Integrating Archaeobotany and Zooarchaeology at the Classic Maya Site of Motul de San Jose, Guatemala

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
Integrating Archaeobotany and Zooarchaeology at the Classic Maya Site of Motul de San Jose, Guatemala
Physical Description:
1 online resource (158 p.)
Language:
english
Creator:
Hare,Lizzy
Publisher:
University of Florida
Place of Publication:
Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date:

Thesis/Dissertation Information

Degree:
Master's ( M.A.)
Degree Grantor:
University of Florida
Degree Disciplines:
Anthropology
Committee Chair:
Emery, Kitty F
Committee Members:
Heckenberger, Michael J
Jarzen, David M
Wyatt, Andrew

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Anthropology -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre:
Anthropology thesis, M.A.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract:
Environmental archaeology and its techniques are increasingly being used in the Maya area in order to better understand not only natural resource consumption, but also the nature of political and economic systems more broadly. This study combines analyses of macrobotanical, microbotanical, and faunal materials and presents them alongside other environmental data previously analyzed from the Classic Maya site of Motul de San Jose, Guatemala. The utility of each of the three datasets is considered individually as well as in conjunction with one another. The study focused specifically on household middens and the excavations of Plaza II, which has some evidence to suggest it had been used as a marketplace. Analyzing the three datasets side by side provided for a clear picture of the environment that had been present at the site. Despite the effects of taphonomic processes on the botanical remains, the combination of both macro- and microbotanical analyses provided more information than either would have individually. However, the evaluation of the proposed marketplace in the Plaza II area of the site was inconclusive using these three datasets alone.
General Note:
In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note:
Includes vita.
Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description:
Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description:
This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility:
by Lizzy Hare.
Thesis:
Thesis (M.A.)--University of Florida, 2011.
Local:
Adviser: Emery, Kitty F.

Record Information

Source Institution:
UFRGP
Rights Management:
Applicable rights reserved.
Classification:
lcc - LD1780 2011
System ID:
UFE0043379:00001


This item is only available as the following downloads:


Full Text

PAGE 1

1 INTEGRATING ARCHAEOB OTANY AND ZOOARCHAEO LOGY AT THE CLASSIC MAYA SITE OF MOTUL D E SAN JOSE, GUATEMAL A By LIZZY HARE A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQU IREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2011

PAGE 2

2 2011 Lizzy Hare

PAGE 3

3 To Mum and Paul

PAGE 4

4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This thesis was made possible with the assistance and input of my advisor, Dr. Kitty Emery. I would also like to thank Drs. Andrew Wyatt and David Jarzen for their patience and gracious support offered in the form of training and laboratory space, without which much of this analysis would not have been possible. I deeply appreciate the intellectual challenges offered to me by Dr. Michael Heckenberger, the much This research was partially funded by the University of Florida Center for Latin American Field Research Grant. This funding allowed me to travel to the Paleoethnobot any Laboratory at the University of Missouri and work with Dr. Deborah Pearsall, who generously allowed me the use of her laboratory space and introduced me to her graduate students, Neil Duncan and Abigail Middleton. Neil and Abigail taught me to process for and identify phytoliths, and along with Jack Stoetzel and Orion I must extend very special thanks to Ashley Somers, who has always supported even my most wacky ideas. I never woul d have made it through my time at UF without her comic relief at the end of the telephone line. I have benefitted in many ways from extended conversations with Dr. Matthew Watson, possibly one of the best friends I have ever had. I thank him for his insigh ts, encouragement, criticism, and perhaps most of all I thank him for his belief in my abilities, especially at those times when I lacked it myself. A very special thank you to the community I have found here at UF: Ellen Lofaro, Joe Feldman, Ryan Morini, Jamie Ma rks, Ed and Diana Gonzalez Tennan t, Bonnie Le, Chet Simocko, Jeffrey Vadala, Jessica Jean Casler, Caitlin Baird, Alissa Jordan, Jon Simon Suarez, Alan Shultz, Gypsy Price, Sarah Page Chan, and Dr. Greg

PAGE 5

5 Webster. You made Gainesville into a home, and I will mis s you all terribly. I must thank KW ow, BriTy, and Dirty J for knowing how to party it up in the basement. Finally, I thank my wonderful, bizarre, extended, non traditional family. I owe a deep debt of gratitude to Michelle and Jim Curran, who e ncouraged me to explore and think critically about the world from an early age. I certainly would not be here without your influence. That is not to exclude the rest of the Currans, Grandma Joan especially, for support and love over the years. Stacey, Tom, Jon, Mimi, Paula, Eric, Clay, Jennifer, and Brian: though I know I have at times seemed distant from the family, I appreciate immensely the alternative perspectives your lives offer. Thank you for being a part of the amorphous grouping I call kin. But mos t of all, thank you mum & Paul for always having faith in me and allowing me to follow my heart. I appreciate your support more than you will ever know.

PAGE 6

6 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 4 LIST OF TABLES ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 8 LIST OF FIGURES ................................ ................................ ................................ ........ 10 ABSTRACT ................................ ................................ ................................ ................... 11 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTORY REMARKS ................................ ................................ ................ 12 Introduction ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 12 Theoretical Background to the Study of Market Economics in Archaeology ........... 13 Study Area ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 17 Background to Environmental Archaeology in Mesoamerica ................................ .. 23 Microbotanicals ................................ ................................ ................................ 23 Macrobotanicals ................................ ................................ ............................... 27 Faunal Materials ................................ ................................ ............................... 30 Combining Environmental Data ................................ ................................ ........ 32 2 METHODS ................................ ................................ ................................ .............. 38 Analysis of the Datasets: Phytoliths ................................ ................................ ........ 38 Archaeological S ampling : Phytoliths ................................ ................................ 38 Identification : Phytoliths ................................ ................................ .................... 38 Quantification : P hytoliths ................................ ................................ .................. 40 Analysis of the Datasets: Macrobotanical Remains ................................ ................ 41 Archaeological S ampling : Macrobotanical Remains ................................ ......... 41 Identification : Macrobotanical Remains ................................ ............................ 41 Quantification : Macrobotanical Remains ................................ .......................... 42 Analysis of the Datasets: Faunal Materials ................................ ............................. 42 Archaeological S ampling : Faunal Materials ................................ ...................... 42 Identification : Faunal Materi als ................................ ................................ ......... 43 Quantification : Faunal Materials ................................ ................................ ....... 43 Analysis of the Datasets: Combined Remains ................................ ........................ 43 Statement of Biases ................................ ................................ ......................... 45 Testing Biases and Strengths of Environmental Datasets ................................ 46 Predictions of the Mar ketplace Model ................................ .............................. 47 3 RESULTS ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 50 Macrobotanicals ................................ ................................ ................................ ...... 50 Taxonomic Resu lts ................................ ................................ ........................... 50

PAGE 7

7 Preservation (Identifiability and Taphonomic A lterations) ................................ 50 Intrusion ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 51 Marketplace Testing ................................ ................................ ......................... 51 Phytoliths ................................ ................................ ................................ ................ 53 Taxonomic Results ................................ ................................ ........................... 53 Preservation (Identifiability and Taphonomic A lterations) ................................ 54 Intrusion: ................................ ................................ ................................ ........... 55 Marketplace T esting ................................ ................................ ......................... 56 Phytolith Analysis from Other C ontexts: ................................ ........................... 57 Fauna ................................ ................................ ................................ ...................... 58 Taxonomic R esults ................................ ................................ ........................... 58 Preservation (Identifiability and Taxonomic A lterations) ................................ ... 59 Intrusion ................................ ................................ ................................ ............ 59 M arketplace T esting ................................ ................................ ......................... 60 4 INTERPRETATION ................................ ................................ ................................ 70 Evaluating the Strengths of the Multiple D atasets ................................ .................. 70 Evaluating the Marketplace H ypothesis ................................ ................................ .. 72 5 CONCLUDING REMARKS ................................ ................................ ..................... 76 APPENDIX A PHYTOLITH PROCESSING PROCEDURES ................................ ......................... 77 B DETAILED PROVENIENCE AND TAXONOMIC INFORMATION .......................... 88 LIST OF REFERENCES ................................ ................................ ............................. 143 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ................................ ................................ .......................... 158

PAGE 8

8 LIST OF TABLES Table page 3 1 Macrobotanical materials by t axa ................................ ................................ ....... 63 3 2 Carbonized taxa from household middens and p laza II samples ....................... 63 3 3 Level of identifiability of macrobotanical m aterials ................................ .............. 63 3 4 Percentage of identifiable macrobotanical r emains ................................ ............ 63 3 5 Variability of abundance of all macrobotanical r emains ................................ ...... 63 3 6 Variability of taxonomic d ist ribution of all macrobotanical r emains ..................... 64 3 7 Variability of abundance and taxonomic distribution of carbonized botanical r emains ................................ ................................ ................................ ............... 64 3 8 Diversity and evenness of all macrobotanical r emains ................................ ....... 64 3 9 Signifi cant macrobotanical r emains ................................ ................................ .... 64 3 10 Microbotanical materials by t axa ................................ ................................ ........ 65 3 11 Level of i de ntifiability of microbotanical r emains ................................ ................. 65 3 12 Percentage of identifiable p hytoliths ................................ ................................ ... 65 3 13 Variability of a bundanc e of p hytoliths ................................ ................................ 65 3 14 Variability of taxonomic distribution of p hytoliths ................................ ................ 65 3 15 Diversity and evenness of microbotanical r emains ................................ ............. 66 3 16 Significant phytolith t axa ................................ ................................ ..................... 66 3 17 Relative abundance of faunal t axa from the Plaza II area and select household middens.. ................................ ................................ .......................... 67 3 18 Leve l of identifiability of fauna l m aterial ................................ .............................. 68 3 19 Percentage of fragmented or eroded faunal m aterials ................................ ........ 68 3 20 Di versity and evenness of faunal m aterials ................................ ........................ 68 3 21 Variability of abundance of faunal m aterials ................................ ....................... 68 3 22 Variability in t a xonomic distribution of faunal m aterials ................................ ...... 69

PAGE 9

9 3 23 Significant f auna ................................ ................................ ................................ 69 3 24 Relative Abundance of taxa by preferred h abitat. ................................ ............... 69 B 1 Macrobotanicals ................................ ................................ ................................ 88 B 2 Microbotanicals ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 92 B 3 Faunal m aterials ................................ ................................ ................................ 95

PAGE 10

10 LIST OF FIGURES Figure page 1 1 Map of Motul de San Jose and surrounding region. ................................ ........... 34 1 2 Map of Motul de San Jose and surrounding minor centers. ............................... 35 1 3 Map of Plaza II Area with proveniences of the datasets analyzed in this thesis. ................................ ................................ ................................ ................. 36 1 4 Map of Motul de San Jo se site core and East Transect ................................ ..... 37 4 1 Phytolith Density in the Plaza II area, as compared with P values. .................... 75

PAGE 11

11 Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts INTEGRATING ARCHAEOB OTANY AND ZOOARCHAEO LOGY AT THE CLASSIC MAYA SITE OF MOTUL D E SAN JOSE, GUATEMAL A By Elizabeth Maree Hare August 2011 Chair: Kitty F. Emery Major: Anthropology Environmental archaeology and its techniques are increasingly being used in the Maya area in order to better understand not only natural resource consumption, but also the nature of political and ec onomic systems more broadly. This study combines analyses of macrobotanical, microbotanical, and faunal materials and presents them alongside other environmental data previously analyzed from the Classic Maya site of Motul de San Jose, Guatemala. The utili ty of each of the three datasets is considered individually as well as in conjunction with one another. The study focused specifically on household middens and the excavations of Plaza II, which has some evidence to suggest it had been used as a marketplac e. Analyzing the three datasets side by side provided for a clear picture of the environment that had been present at the site. Despite the effects of taphonomic processes on the botanical remains, the combination of both macro and microbotanical analys es provided more information than either would have individually. However, the evaluation of the proposed marketplace in the Plaza II area of the site was inconclusive using these three datasets alone.

PAGE 12

12 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTORY REMARKS Introduction The go al of this project is to evaluate the utility of combining multiple environmental datasets to reconstruct the movement of natural resources through the ancient Maya economic system. I have worked with three distinct datasets: microbotanical, macrobotanical and faunal materials and linked these to existing archaeological data from the site generated by the Motul de San Jose Archaeology Project directed by Dr. Antonia Foias and Dr. Kitty Emery (Ecology Subproject ). Each of these datasets has been evaluated in dividually to determine the strength of the data it provides, and then the data is combined to offer an interpretation of natural resource use. Resource distribution is compared between selected household middens, agricultural transects and Plaza II, a pro posed marketplace at the site of Motul de San Jose. Differential distribution of resources could be representative of different activity zones (such as domestic refuse areas, public use spaces, and public refuse areas) and the different economies involved in activities in those zones across the site (such as quotidian activities of the elite and non elite, domestic and public ritual exchanges, and market exchange). I propose that the combined data will provide more accurate information on the differential u se of resources in the activity areas of the site (households, marketplace, and transects) than would any one dataset alone. I also propose that these combined datasets will reveal evidence to evaluate the suggested use of the Motul de San Jose Plaza II as a location for market based economic exchange.

PAGE 13

13 Theoretical Background to the Study of Market Economics in Archaeology The nature of the Maya economic system is still being debated. Market based economic systems in Mesoamerica have not been or particular interest to archaeologists until fairly recently. In the past few decades, scholars have begun to consider the possibility of a market exchange system in the Classic Maya lowlands (Dahlin, et al. 2009; Dahlin, et al. 2007; Hirth 2000; Staller and Carrasco 2009). In their 2007 article, Dahlin et al. (2007) define a market economy as: The production of goods or services with the express purpose of receiving goods or services of approximately equal or greater value in return; that is, at least some surplus pr oduction is generated and destined for exchange for other needed or highly desirable items or services rather than for consumption within the househ old or to pay taxes and tribute (Dahlin, et al. 2007). There is ethnohistoric data demonstrating commercial ties between highland Mexico and the lowland Maya in the Late Postclassic Period, and the extent of use of long distance trade items such as cacao and salt further supports claims of trading on a scale that goes beyond redistribution among the elites (Dah lin, et al. 2007; Hirth 1998; Kepecs 1994; Tozzer 1941). Market economies are not easy to find evidence for in the archaeological record, at least not using traditional archaeological methods. One factor complicating archaeological analysis of markets is a lack of widely accepted definitions and a conflation of terms. For the purposes of this paper and following (Garraty 2010), economy as defined above, which is distinct fr site of exchange. Marketplaces are typically large, open areas, in or near urban centers that are easily accessible by both vendors and consumers. Many large Classic Period Maya

PAGE 14

14 centers have at least one plaza that i s central to the site and easily accessible. Conventional thought has been that these plazas would have been used as public gathering places for ceremonial purposes. Using soil chemistry and detailed surface mapping of these open spaces at several Late Cla ssic sites including Chunchucmil in the north and Trinidad in the southern lowlands, Dahlin and colleagues have revealed patterned accumulations of both rock and various organics (primarily phosphate) and heavy metals. Comparing these to similar signatures at the modern day marketplace in Antigua, Guatemala, Dahlin et al. (2007) believe they have found the material remains of ancient marketplaces, which presumably was used for the exchange of goods within a market economy. Archaeologists are still workin g toward developing a methodological and theoretical toolkit for locating and understanding market economies in the archaeological record. Hirth (1998) outlines four approaches for detecting market exchange, and Stark and Garraty (2010) add another potenti al approach. Not all of these models are readily testable or quantifiable, but the configurational, distributional, and regional production distributional approaches more readily lend themselves to quantification and testing than other approaches. It is ge nerally accepted that market economics may occur in the absence of a marketplace, but that if a market place is present, so too is a market economy (Feinman and Garraty 2010; Garraty 2010; Hirth 1998; Hirth 2000; Stark and Garraty 2010). Thus, several arch aeologists have focused their efforts on locating and identifying a marketplace in the archaeological record configurational approaches to detecting marketplaces include look ing at architectural

PAGE 15

15 markers on both a large and a small scale, such as the large empty plazas and then the smaller internal divisions inside them (Hirth 2009). A configurational approach could also be used in examining soil chemistry patterns and comparin g them against known marketplaces such as the work done comparing Chinchucmil with the Antigua marketplace (Dahlin, et al. 2007). The distributional approach to detecting market exchange looks at the spatial distribution of utilitarian goods at the househo ld level. Hirth argues that households that are participating in a market exchange system will have artifact assemblages that are homogenous across ranks, because in market 98). However, as Feinman and Garraty (2010) point out, other factors could affect the artifactual composition so that the distributions look more homogenous. Stark and distribution approach operates on a more broadly regional identified by the presence of a consistent pattern of access by ordinary households to specialist crafts over a relatively large area (Stark and Garraty 2010). It is theor ized that the elites would not have had the logistical capabilities to disseminate utilitarian goods on a large scale, and thus market exchange mechanisms would be necessary for broad scale distribution of bulky, low value items such as ceramic cookware (S tark and Garraty 2010). Though archaeologists in the Maya area are increasingly interested in the possibility of finding evidence for marketplace economies, the more commonly accepted theory of Maya economic organization is that of a redistributive system that has more or less separate elite and utilitarian economic spheres (Foias 2002; Masson 2002). The

PAGE 16

16 elite economy is restricted to the goods used to affirm status and differentiation amongst the elite members of Maya society (Masson 2002). These goods wou ld have included items produced by specialist artisans, such as jade or shell jewelry and elaborately decorated polychrome ceramics. It is thought that prestige goods were exchanged as gifts amongst the nobility during feasting events that took place in re stricted, elite only contexts (Foias 2002; McAnany, et al. 2002). In contrast to the elite economic sphere, the economics of utilitarian or general goods is thought to have been based on small scale workshops that were dispersed outside of the major cente rs (Masson 2002). Building on this model, Dahlin et al. (2009) was a redistributive elite economy and another being a market exchange system, with others lying at points between these two ends. The presence of a marketplace and market exchange at a site does not preclude the existence of coexisting redistributive economic systems, though it is likely that the differing economic systems were used for the exchange of differe nt types of goods. For example, trade in foodstuffs and other basic necessities may have been through a largely market exchange based system, while goods with more restricted access, such as those produced by specialty artisans, may have been exchanged thr ough redistributive networks (Dahlin, et al. 2009). Such a system may be used by larger and more complex societies where storage and transportation of bulky, utilitarian goods is impractical (D'Altroy and Earle 1985). Thus the marketplace would likely be a location used primarily for the exchange and distribution of bulky, utilitarian goods such as foodstuffs and utilitarian ceramics and lithic materials.

PAGE 17

17 The economic models I will be considering are or market exchange economics and redistributive economic s, compared across households (wherein domestic economies were the primary activities producing material waste) and an open space between administrative buildings (where the waste was produced by primarily public space activities including possibly ritual economic activities such as feasting or exchange of elite materials, or market economic activities such as crafting and trade of domestic products). The material remains I will be examining include those often considered only within the domestic sphere (pl ant and animal remains) although they were clearly often part of ritual and elite life as well. These remains have an advantage in revealing different economic activities because they are a component of all economies and also because they may be preserved as waste where other material remains were purposefully removed for discard, reuse, or curation. Study Area Motul de San Jose is located approximately three km north of Lake Petn Itza, in Guatemala (Figure 1 1). This central Petn region has been subject to many ongoing archaeological investigations during the last several decades, including ecological studies that examine the role of the natural environment in the regional history (Anselmetti, et al. 2006; Brenner, et al. 2002; Curtis, et al. 1998; Emery 2003; Emery and Thornton 2008b; Jensen, et al. 2007; Moriarty 2004; Mueller, et al. 2009; Rosenmeier, et al. 2002). Since 1998, the Motul de San Jose Archaeology Project, directed by Foias and Emery, has been combining archaeological and ecological studies at the sites within the Motul de San Jose polity, including the capital site of Motul de San Jose and its subsidiary sites of Trinidad, Acte, Chakokot, Buenavista, and Chachacluum (Figure 1 2). The focus of Foias and Emery's work has been on the

PAGE 18

18 economics of the small polity, and Emery has specifically studied the economics of natural resource use within the community (Foias and Emery In Press). The site of Motul de San Jose, where my research is focused, is currently protected as a national park by the G uatemalan National Institute of Anthropology and History. Motul de San Jose was the capital of a small polity including secondary and smaller sites during the Late and Terminal Classic periods (Moriarty 2004). These outlying sites, particularly Chakokot, T rinidad, and Buenavista, are located near natural resources, suggesting that the sites were strategically located for the management of goods (Emery 2003). Despite its location near more massive sites such as Tikal, Motul de San Jose was a strong political center within the region to the north and northwest of Lake Petn Itza during the time of its political apogee in the Late Classic, approximately 650 830 AD (Foias and Emery In Press). There is evidence for Motul de San Jose being a center for production of the Ik Polychrome Style pottery, a key elite pottery style that is distributed throughout the Maya lowlands (Foias, et al. In Press). The paintings on these ceramic vessels included text that named the rulers of the Ik polity, and chemical sourcing indi cates they were made in the Motul de San Jose area (Reents Budet, et al. In Press). The exchange of these elaborate ceramics served to solidify political ties to other centers, including very large sites, such as Calakmul. The monumental core of Motul de San Jose is relatively small, including five elite residential or ritual groups. Group C, the largest of the elite groups though not the residence of the ruling elite, contains a public plaza that lies to the north of the acropolis (Figure 1 3). This publi c space, Plaza II, was tested by Richard Terry and his students for phosphates and heavy metals and the results were consistent with the patterns

PAGE 19

19 expected in marketplace areas, leading them to hypothesize that this plaza may have been the site of a market place at Motul de San Jose (Bair and Terry In Press). The first phase of the Motul de San Jose Archaeological Project excavations took place between 1998 and 2003, during which time the site core and northern and eastern zones were mapped (Figure 1 4). Ex cavations were conducted in and around MSJ primary and periphery structures, house floors and middens were tested for organic and heavy metal signatures to study activity areas, and soils from both settlements and areas that appeared to lack evidence of hu man occupation were tested for phosphate, a possible indicator of intensive agricultural practices, and carbon isotopes, an indicator of corn production (Emery 2003; Foias and Emery In Press). The MSJ project has incorporated environmental archaeology sinc e the beginning, specifically in the form of the Ecology Sub Project. The early incorporation of environmental archaeology into the project has resulted in systematic collection and analysis of soil samples, botanical remains, and faunal materials. The Mo pitting program that sampled materials in residential middens so that the refuse deposits could be compared across the site core (Foias, et al. In Press). These middens include faunal mat erials (Emery In Press; Emery 2003) and chemical residues (Bair and Terry In Press) of residential activities, and were also sampled for botanical remains, analyzed in this study. Shovel tests and test pits were conducted in the groups surrounding Plaza II as well as more extensive operations to explore the Acropolis at the south edge of the plaza (operation MSJ2A), the residential groups north of the plaza (MSJ19), as well as the structures to the northeast (MSJ33), the west (MSJ29), and the east (MSJ46) of the

PAGE 20

20 plaza area. Excavations along the south edge of the plaza area (operation 2A) and along its southeastern side (operation 46), at the edge of the Acropolis platform, revealed a dense midden that included elite polychrome ceramics and vases with hiero glyphic inscriptions, ceramic wasters indicative of pottery production, and broken sherds with use wear patterns indicative of use as ceramic polishers, among other more utilitarian artifact types (Foias, et al. In Press). These midden materials indicate M otul de San Jose was a center of production and exchange of prestige ceramics. At the north edge of the plaza, operation 19 excavated a minor domestic group and found a dense midden with ceramics, lithics, and quantities of faunal materials that indicate i t may have been the location of feasting activity (Yorgey et al. 1999). Operation 29, on the west edge of the plaza, revealed an eroded plaza floor and underneath that, a north south oriented drainage channel that had been cut into the bedrock in antiquity to facilitate drainage of the plaza area (Ramrez et al. 2000). Operation 33, in the northeast corner of the plaza II area, contained a residential group with a household midden containing lithic, ceramic, and faunal materials (Ramrez et al. 2000). Soi l chemical investigations of Motul de San Jose were done by Richard Terry and students and Elizabeth Webb and colleagues over the course of the Motul de San Jose Archaeological Project. These investigations sampled occupational surfaces, potential agricult ural areas, household middens and the Plaza II area. The goals of the soil chemical investigations were to identify evidence of ancient agriculture, define activity areas within structures and plazas, and to better understand the general soil characteristi cs of the area (Bair and Terry In Press). The soil chemistry investigations included studies in both standard geochemistry by Terry and students, such as testing

PAGE 21

21 for phosphate and trace metals (Cu, Fe, Mn, Pb, and Zn) as well as stable carbon isotopes by W ebb and colleagues, which can be used as a proxy for maize agriculture (Bair and Terry In Press; Webb et al. 2007). Of particular interest here, geochemical and stable isotope analysis was done in the Plaza II area at Motul de San Jose. A single unit withi n the Plaza II was studied for physical and chemical characters (Jensen, et al. 2007) and carbon isotopes (Webb, et al. 2007). Stable carbon isotope data reveal that since the Terminal Classic, C3 vegetation has been predominant across the plaza area confi rming that the plaza area has not been in agricultural cultivation since that time. Both the buried A horizon that predates the construction of the plaza, and the fill brought in to level the plaza contain signatures that strongly indicate C4 vegetation, s uggesting maize agriculture had been present in the plaza prior to construction, and that the soil being used as fill had also come from an area where maize had been cultivated (Webb et al. 2007). In addition, Terry and students sample tested the entire pl aza for chemical patterning. Background phosphate levels were higher for Plaza II than other plazas at the site or the open areas around it, suggesting that these levels were obtained through high levels of human activity that brought in large quantities o f organic materials to the plaza area (Bair and Terry In Press). Transects were extended beyond the site core toward the tertiary and secondary centers in three directions: south, east, and north (Moriarty 2004). Detailed settlement and soils research alo ng the east transect reveals that the area between the Motul de San Jose site core and these centers would have been used, at least in places, for agricultural land (Jensen, et al. 2007). The agricultural potential of the soils was determined using the USD A/NRCS soil classification system by Richard Terry's team,

PAGE 22

22 and these were correlated to the soil classification of the contemporary Itz Maya conducted by Moriarty. Soil samples from the eastern transect that connected the site center of Motul de San Jose with the rural site of Chkokot were processed for stable carbon isotopes as well as for phytoliths. Of the 16 samples that were processed stable 75cm depth, indicating t hat significant quantities of C4 plants had been growing in that have been grown at the site include both the intentional cultivation of maize, as well as opportuni stic tropical grasses that appear after forest clearance for agriculture. Reconstructions of the economics and politics of the Classic period Motul de San Jose polity are the subject of an upcoming volume by Foias and Emery (in press). Archaeological inv estigations at the site have revealed that it was economically integrated with subsidiary sites in the area and its hinterlands. Some of these subsidiary sites show evidence for some degree of specialization, such as agricultural production at Chkokot (We bb, et al. 2007), or chert biface production at Buenavista (Emery and Foias In Press). These products were likely brought into the center of the site to be exchanged through a combination of mechanisms, possibly including taxation or tribute, market exchan ge, and estate production and redistribution (Emery and Foias In Press). Within the site core, there is evidence for highly specialized craft production, especially in the area surrounding Plaza II. These elite structures contain evidence for the productio n of textiles with shell nacre adornment (Emery In Press), elaborate polychrome vessels (Foias, et al. In Press), and painting or scribing activities (Halperin In Press).

PAGE 23

23 Background to Environmental Archaeology in Mesoamerica Archaeologists in Mesoameric a have been increasingly interested in exploring the interrelationships between ancient people and their environments. Environmental archaeologists in Mesoamerica have turned to faunal materials, macro and micro botanical remains, isotopic studies and soil chemistry analysis in order to better understand the environments of the archaeological sites (Beach, et al. 2009; Dahlin, et al. 2009; Dahlin, et al. 2007; Emery and Thornton 2008a; Emery and Thornton 2008b; Ford 2008; Freiwald 2009; Goldstein and Hagema n 2009; Webb, et al. 2007). Since the inception of the Motul de San Jose Archaeological Project, Emery has directed the Ecological Sub Project at Motul and its subsidiary sites. The Ecological Sub Project designed all field research such that there was a m aximum investment in recovering as many different environmental datasets as possible. My research will be focusing on three of those datasets, microbotanical, macrobotanical, and faunal materials, but will use the information produced from other aspects of the archaeological and ecological studies in the analysis. Microbotanicals For the purposes of this study, microbotanical remains have been limited to of the durabili ty of this particular plant microfossil. Phytoliths are silicate deposits produced in and around the cells of a plant as they uptake silica from ground water (Piperno 2003). This silicate composition causes phytoliths to respond quite differently to taphon omic processes than would organic micro fossils (such as pollen and spores). Furthermore, phytoliths offer an additional advantage over pollen in that they are not reproductive in nature, and thus it is not evolutionarily advantageous for phytoliths to be

PAGE 24

24 dispersed away from the plant that produced them (Piperno 2006). Phytoliths are usually found very near to the location where the producing plant decayed, and therefore are useful in archaeological contexts where spatial control is desirable. Many economic ally important wild plants as well as most of the important Mesoamerican domesticated plants produce diagnostic phytoliths which can be used to determine where these taxa were grown, processed, and consumed (Bozarth 1987; Bozarth 1990; Piperno 1985; Pipern o 1994; Piperno and Pearsall 1998). Two types of mineralized substances formed within higher plants can be called phytoliths. Silica phytoliths are the most commonly studied to, and those are what will be referred to as phytoliths from here on. Calcium oxa late crystals that form in cacti, succulents, and some other desert plants will be excluded, because they are of less utility for archaeological research. As plants grown, they take up soluble silica (monosilicic acid, H4SiO4), among other minerals, throu gh their roots as they absorb groundwater. Some of that silica is deposited in the form of silicon dioxide (SiO2) in intercellular spaces, in fillings of cell walls, and cell interiors. In some cases the deposition is a passive process related to evapotran spiration, such as in leaves, but in the majority of cases, phytoliths develop in locales that would indicate active control leaves (Piperno 2006). The mechanisms that co ntrol the degree of silica that is deposited appear to be at least partly under genetic and metabolic control (Piperno 2006; Piperno, et al. 2002). Some plant species do not produce phytoliths at all, while others are particularly heavy producers. The pre sence of phytoliths can be advantageous for some plants. Some plants depend on phytoliths for structural support,

PAGE 25

25 such as scouring rushes, while other plants might benefit from the aluminum sequestering qualities of silicon (Chen and Lewin 1969; Piperno 20 06; Sangster and Hodson 1992). In the case of Cucurbita and Zea two economically important neotropical domesticates, a gene has been found that links the production of phytoliths and lignin, creating what is essentially a single gene that controls for the toughness of the exterior of the plant; a defense against herbivory (Piperno, et al. 2002). Because the presence of silica can be beneficial in the growth and development of plants, there is consistency to the locations of phytolith production in plants, such as the epidermis of seeds and fruits, the subepidermal tissue of orchid and palm leaves, and the seed glumes of grasses (Bozarth 1992; Mullholland 1993; Piperno 1989; Piperno and Pearsall 1993; Piperno and Pearsall 1998). Plants that produce phytolith s will do so even when groundwater supplies of silicon are relatively low, including tropical soils (Piperno 2006). When the plant dies, the microscopic pieces of silica are deposited in the soil and sediment where the plant used to be, where they tend to remain, largely undisturbed and available for collection by archaeological and paleoecological researchers. Because most phytoliths are silt sized particles, in areas that are subject to strong winds, phytoliths are likely to be blown away with silts, but this is not common. While phytoliths are perhaps the most durable of plant microfossils, they do degrade, and the rate of dissolution depends on the type of phytolith and the chemical and physical characteristics of the soil or sediment in which it is depo sited (Piperno 2006). Highly alkaline soils are known to be particularly destructive of phytoliths, especially when

PAGE 26

26 combined with high annual temperatures and high annual rainfall, such as in tropical environments (Piperno 2006). Phytolith morphology va ries depending on the type of phytolith. Some phytoliths, such as those that form in the epidermis, form exact casts of the morphology of the plant. Other types of phytoliths form in an incomplete silicification of the interior part of a cell. This is part icularly common among Poaceae, Cyperaceae, Marantaceae, and Aracaeae (Pearsall 2000). Another category of phytoliths are those that form in spaces between lower hypodermal and upper mesocarpal tissues, such as in Cucurbita fruit (Piperno 2006). Classificat ion and terminology are not yet standardized across all phytolith researchers. One of the complicating factors is that unrelated taxa produce similar phytoliths, and many species produce multiple different phytoliths simultaneously. Dr. Deborah Pearsall an d the University of Missouri Paleobotany Laboratory use the Missouri Classification System for phytoliths, which breaks the types down into 11 major categories, of which there are many subcategories. These categories are mostly based on morphological chara cteristics, and thus, the anatomical origin of the phytolith (Pearsall and Dinan 1992). Dolores Piperno categorizes phytolith types first by family and then by morphological characteristics (Piperno 2006). Phytoliths are useful in reconstructing past envir onments based on the dynamics of vegetation change over time. In one example, phytoliths extracted from lake sediment cores from Panama were used to determine changes in the vegetation of the watershed from both climatic variability and the e ffects of anth ropogenic fire (Piperno 1993). Especially in the context of lake core sediments, phytolith and pollen analyses complement each other well because they tend to not overlap too much in the taxa they

PAGE 27

27 represent well (Pearsall 2000; Piperno 1993). A study done in the Maya area, however, found poor recovery of phytoliths extracted from lakebed sediments, and for that lake pollen was much more successful for describing the ancient vegetation of the watershed (Leyden, et al. 1996). Phytoliths also are not as likely to be transported over long distances, so they are potentially more reliably local to the site they were recovered from (Dinan and Rowlett 1993). Phytolith analysis is rarely done in the Maya area, most likely due to poor preservation and the difficulties of recovering phytoliths from archaeological sediments from the region ( Bozarth and Guderjan 2004; Hansen, et al. 2002; Leyden, et al. 1996). P hytoliths were used in conjunction with pollen analysis and staple isotope studies to better understand the util ity of the seasonally wet bajo environment around the Mirador basin (Hansen, et al. 200 2), and the technique of combining phytolith, pollen, and stable isotope evidence was also used successfully in a study of wetlands and terraces from across the Maya low lands (Beach, et al. 2011). At the site of Piedras Negras, Guatemala, the presence of Poaceae phytoliths supported the isotopic evidence of forest clearing for intensive agriculture around the site (Fernndez, et al. 2005). Macrobotanicals Macrobotanical remains have been analyzed in order to obtain information about the diversity of plant materials at the site. Macrobotanical assemblages are botanical remains recovered from archaeological sites that can be viewed with the naked eye (Pearsall 2000) Because they involve the least amount of specialized laboratory equipment for processing and identification, macrobotanical materials are the most frequently studied of all types of archaeobotanical remains. M acrobotanical remains may include wood, seeds, fruits, tubers, nutshell, and plant fibers (Wright 2010) In this

PAGE 28

28 study, these remains are limited to carbonized plant macrofossil s. Macrobotanical remains disproportionately favor the recovery of woody plant remains, which are typically not represented in the phytolith record, so these two proxies complement each other well (Hastorf, et al. 20 05; Piperno 2006; Wright 2010) Like all materials found at archaeological sites, what eventually constitutes the macrobotanical assemblage at a site is determined by a series of events that largely eliminates material from the archaeological record. Cul tural factors that affect which plant remains will be found at a site are introduced during the collecting, processing, and disposal of plant remains in antiquity. Different parts of a site may have different assemblages based on different food procurement strategies. In agricultural communities, such as Ancient Maya sites, there will also be portions of the macrobotanical assemblage that represent by products from plants, in addition to the intended agricultural products (Wright 2010) Plant materials are first discarded, abandoned, or lost, before something intervenes with the typical process of decomposition so that the materials survive until the archaeologists recover them ma ny centuries later. Most of the plants that were used at an archaeological site will not make it into the archaeological record. Once plant materials are left at a site, they are subject to the same taphonomic processes as any other types of artifacts or e cofacts. In the Maya area, only carbonized remains are studied unless the materials were collected in very specific contexts, such as dry caves, sealed tombs, or a wetland environment (Wyatt 2008a; Wyatt 2008b; Wyatt et al. In Press) Fluctuations in moisture, a characteristic of the humid Petn lowlands, are especially detrimental to the preservation of carbonized botanical materials, so it is no surprise that the general state

PAGE 29

29 of preservation of macrobotanical mat erial from Motul de San Jose is not good (Morehart 2002; Wyatt 2008a; Wyatt 2008b; Wyatt, et al. In Press) Macrobotanical remains are collected from the archaeological site during excavations. Water flotation is u sually the preferred method of recovery for botanical materials from archaeological sites, because it is relatively gentle on the fragile remains. A sub sample of five to ten liters of soil from the excavation is fairly standard in the Maya lowlands regio n, as there tends not to be large quantities of carbonized botanical remains in the sediments (Wyatt, et al. In Press) Collecting materials from all contexts, not just the ones where botanical materials are expected to be found, can reduce excavator bias, and also ensures that the samples have been collected so that they can be revisited if it is later determined that they may be useful (Pearsall 2000) In the Maya area, archaeobotanical research using macrobotanical materials has typically focused on subsistence strategies and land u se patterns. Studies of macrobotanical remains from archaeological sites in the Maya region continually support the long held notion that the Maya relied heavily on the Mesoamerican food triad (maize, beans, squash) for their subsistence (Lentz 1999) At the site of Cern, ar chaeobotanists have also uncovered evidence for cultivation of chili peppers, manioc and cotton (Lentz, et al. 1996) However, some archaeobotanical research has more tho roughly explored natural resources within the broader context of the economic systems. At the site of Chan, Belize, paleoethnobotanical research on the agricultural terraces found evidence for the Maya using pine charcoal as a soil amendment (Wyatt 2008b) Since pine does not grow in th at area in present day, it is unlikely that carbonized pine would have found its way into terrace soils without human intervention.

PAGE 30

30 Ash is known to be a useful fertilizer, and the residents of Chan were likely using the pine as a fuel source for household hearths first, and then spreading the spent remains in the fields so as to maximize the potential utility of the imported good. At the site of Xunantunich, Belize, pine was found only in elite contexts, leading researchers to believe that the elites mainta ined control over the use and distribution of the imported commodity (Lentz, et al. 2005) Faunal Materials Faunal material is perhaps the most widely used of the three datasets I am focusing on for this study (Emery 2004b; Emery and Thornton 2008a; Hudson, et al. 1989; Masson 1999; Moholy Nagy 2004; Teeter 2004) Because of the relative durability and visibility of faunal remains, they are more easily recovered using traditiona l field excavation techniques, particularly when fine gauge screening tests are used to evaluate recovery rate as was done by the MSJ project (Emery In Press; Emery 2004b; Peres 2010; Stanchly 2004; Thornton In Press ) Beyond answering questions about subsistence, faunal remains can be used in species fidelity analysis to determine the availability of different species at the site, and isotopic studies of animal bones can be used to track importation of animals from around Mesoamerica (Emery and Thornton 2008a; Emery and Thornton 2008b; Freiwald 2009) Zooarchaeology is the study of the faunal materials from archaeological sites. The study of these materials provides archaeolo gists with information not only about human behavior, but also about the ecological history of the site (Reitz and Wing 2008) Many factors influence the animal remains that ultimately co mprise a zooarchaeological assemblage, starting with ecological factors that limit the availability of certain species, cultural factors that affect which animals are used in what ways and cultural and

PAGE 31

31 ecological factors together play a role in the discard ing of animal remains within archaeological sites. Once in the ground, faunal materials are subject to a range of taphonomic processes, including biotic and abiotic processes that alter the deposited assemblage. Archaeologists have an effect on the zooarch aeological record by introducing a bias when selecting the excavation location and screen size (Reitz and Wing 2008) Zooarchaeology has been an active contributor to our understanding of Maya archaeology for the last forty years (Emery 2004a) Earlier studies tended to focus on foodways and nutrition, and included studies of marine and riverine resource exploitation, as well as some of the first studies that looked at regional or comparati ve patterns of resource use (Carr 1985; Carr 1986; Emery 2004a; Hudson, et al. 1989; Moholy Nagy 1985; Wing 1978) As Mesoamerican zooarchaeological analysis became more sophisticated, some researchers began to focu s their attention on the economic and social relationships expressed in the faunal record. Studies of trade patterns, the use of exotic species, and the transport of animal products became more commonplace (Andrews 1 969; Carr 1996; Emery 1999; Moholy Nagy 1985) Recent zooarchaeological investigations in the Maya area have focused on social status, ethnic identity, and the symbolic or ritual significance of animal resources (Br own 1996; Carr 1996; Emery 2002; Masson 1999; Shaw 1999) Zooarchaeological remains can be used in the study of economics by analyzing the distribution of faunal remains across different time periods and different social ranks. The distribution of diffe rent portions of high value taxa, such as white tailed deer across ranks has been used as a way of understanding how the elite may have obtained their

PAGE 32

32 meat. White tailed deer is common in both high ranked and low ranked households at the site of Motul de S an Jose, but not in the middle ranked households, leading Emery to believe it was the third ranked households that were hunting the animals and providing it to the top ranked elites (Emery In Press) Exotic taxa, such as marine shell at a site located inland, is indicative of long distance trade networks and exchange connecting the site to coastal communities. The preferred habitats of animals recovered can provide information about differential acc ess to resource zones around the site. Combining Environmental Data The three datasets will be used together in conjunction with other archaeological information to determine the environmental resources that were available and being utilized in and around the site of Motul de San Jose. Each of the datasets tends to represent different taxa, yet they yield consistent results about the nature of the environment around the site. This serves not only to explain the ecological context of the archaeological site, but also as an affirmation of the results found in each of the three datasets. Multiple environmental datasets have been used at a few archaeological sites in the Maya area. The site of Chan was an agrarian community in what is now Belize. In addition to traditional archaeological excavations and surveys informed by settlement and household archaeology, the Chan project developed detailed GIS maps, collected and analyzed faunal and macrobotanical materials as well as microartifacts, and conducted soil che mistry analysis (Robin 2008; Wyatt 2008a). The result of their efforts the tradition of Clifford Geertz. That is, they have produced an in depth account of as many c omponents of life at the site as possible in order to better understand what life

PAGE 33

33 was like for the residents of the site and surrounding areas. Also located in Belize, the Blue Creek site used bioarchaeology, extensive GIS mapping, and soil studies to bett er understand the nature of Maya agricultural intensification, natural resource use, and the health and longevity of the regional population (Brown 2011; Guderjan and Krause 2011). The Rio Hondo project, in Northern Belize, used multiple environmental data sets in order to understand how intensified agriculture affected the emergence of political competition in the area (Pohl 1990). This project included aerial photography (Pohl 1990), macrobotanical analysis (Miksicek 1990), pollen analysis (Wiseman 1990) a nd soil chemistry analysis (Pohl, et al. 1990).

PAGE 34

34 Figure 1 1. Map of Motul de San Jose and surrounding r egion. Modified from Foias and Emery (in Press): Fig 1.1

PAGE 35

35 Figure 1 1 Map of Motul de San Jose and s urroundin g minor c ente rs. Modified from Foias and Emery (In Press): Fig. 1.4

PAGE 36

36 Figure 1 3. Map of Plaza II area with proveniences of the datasets analyzed in this t hesis.

PAGE 37

37 Figure 1 4. Map of Motul de San Jose site c ore and East Transect. Courtesy of the Motul de San Jose Ar chaeology Project

PAGE 38

38 CHAPTER 2 METHODS Analysis of the Datasets: Phytoliths Archaeological S ampling : Phytoliths From the outset, the Ecology Subproject of the MSJ Archaeology Project collected samples for microbotanical testing and analysis from excavated d eposits, including transects, middens, and occupation surfaces across the site (Emery 1998a; Emery 1998b) Samples consisting of a minimum of 100ml of soil were collected from a depth of at least 20cm deep to reduce the potential for contamination with modern materials. Samples were collected using a cleaned LaMotte soil corer and were immediately deposited into Whirlpack TM bags. For more detailed information on the field collection of microbotanical samples see Wyatt et al. (In Press). In most proveniences macro and microbotanical samples were collected from the same contexts to ensure overlap, though this was not done in the Pla za II area. Field samples are curated by Emery in the collections of the Environmental Archaeology Program at the Florida Museum of Natural History (FLMNH), in Gainesville, Florida. Identification : Phytoliths Initial feasibility testing of the microbotani cal samples was conducted by volunteer Adam Dubbin under the direct supervision of Dr. David Jarzen in the Paleobotany and Palynology Laboratory of the FLMNH and Emery (Wyatt et al., in press; Hare et al., in prep). This initial testing included experiment al processing to try to recover both organic and silicaceous microfossils in one laboratory procedure. Due to the time consuming and costly nature of microfossil extraction, simultaneous processing for multiple microfossil types is attractive in many situa tions (Lentfer and B oyd 2000) However,

PAGE 39

39 these early experiments indicated that the clay rich, highly carbonate sediments from Motul de San Jose are not well suited to this type of extraction. When viewed under a microscope, the slides produced by Dubbin revealed large quanti ties of pollen and spores, as well as some visible phytoliths and other microscopic plant remains (Wyatt, et al. In Press) Unfortunately the view of many of the microfossils was obstructed by the large quantities of organic matter on the slides. The full details of this analysis are reported in Hare et al., (in prep). I conducted a secon d, more extensive, study of microbotanicals in 2010. To avoid the problems with obstructed slides, this second microbotanical test only extracted phytoliths, thus allowing the samples to undergo a complete organic removal process. I sub sampled 24 soil sam ples from three distinct contexts for phytolith extraction. Twelve phytolith samples were from the Plaza II area, which is the area of the proposed marketplace (Bair and Terry In Press) Of the remaining 12 samples, six were from the east transect and six were from household middens (see Appendix 2). Over the summer eoethnobotany Laboratory under the supervision of Pearsall and Ph.D. candidates Neil Duncan and Abbigail Middleton. This work was conducted with funding from the University of Florida Center for Latin American Studies Field Research Grant. Soil samples wer e processed Procedure, last formally revised September 11, 2005 [citation]. Some modifications were made to the procedure under the guidance of Pearsall and Duncan. See Appendi x I for more detailed information regarding laboratory procedures for processing the Motul de San Jose phytoliths.

PAGE 40

40 I analyzed a portion of these samples in the Pearsall lab, and the remainder in the paleobotany and palynology laboratory of the FLMNH Paleo botany Program, under supervision by Jarzen. I used the University of Missouri Paleoethnobotany Laboratory online database as a primary comparative resource as well as supplemental comparative images contributed to the Society for Phytolith Research listse rve by its members. Identification of the phytoliths was done using a ZeissAxio Scope at 400x magnification. One slide was made per sample. To ensure comparability across slides, twenty passes were made across the slide, starting from top to bottom, left t o right. classification system (Pearsall 2000) Eroded phytoliths or otherwise unidentifiable chunks of silica were also counted, and any diatoms, pollen grains, or other palynomorphs were noted on the counting form. The location of distinctive phytoliths on the slide was recorded, though it seems the mounting medium (Canada balsam) was not fully cured at the time of identification, and so it is not possible to easily re locate some of these distinctive specimens. Quantification : Phytoliths For this study, phytoliths were simply described and counted by type and by taxa. Most phytolith researchers aim for counts of 200 250 phytoliths per slide, at which point the count is stopped, since this range has been demonstrated to be sufficient for calculating percentages (Pearsall 2000; Piperno 2006) Some phytolith researchers follow palynologists in using m ore advanced statistical analyses, such as dissimilarity analysis (Overpeck et al. 1985; Thompson et al. 2004)

PAGE 41

41 Analysis of the Datasets: Macrobotanical Remains Archaeological S ampling : Macrobotanical Remains Macrobotanical remains were gathered by the M SJ Archaeology Project as composite samples from contexts across the site and were processed in the field by Dr. Andrew Wyatt (University of Illinois, Chicago), MSJ project archaeobotanist. Macrobotanical materials were collected under the supervision of E mery and Wyatt as composite samples from contexts across the site. The composite sample strategy, of collecting small amounts of soil from the entire excavation level, was used to ensure the soil sample represents the entire context. Soil was collected fro m depths of 20cm or greater below the surface, to minimize the risk of contamination with modern plant materials. During the first year of excavations, five liter soil samples were used for flotation in a manual IDOT style flotation system. In following ye ars, ten liter soil samples were collected and a more efficient SMAP type flotation system with a gas powered pump was used. In all years heavy fraction was collected with 0.011" window screen. In the first year light fraction was collected on very fine me sh (pantyhose fabric), while in the second year the light fraction was collected on 0.002" copper mesh. Full details of the archaeological sampling and archaeobotanical processing methods can be found in Wyatt et al (in press). These materials were curated first by Wyatt, and now in the Florida Museum of Natural History Environmental Archaeology Program collections. Identification : Macrobotanical Remains For this project I subsampled the macrobotanical remains, selecting only flotation samples from proveni ences matching or adjacent to locations sampled for phytoliths. Over the summer and fall of 2010 I analyzed 56 samples of these remains from the

PAGE 42

42 proposed marketplace and household middens in the Environmental Archaeology Program and Paleobototany laborator ies under supervision of Wyatt. Only carbonized macrobotanical remains were analyzed since, in the humid tropical environment of Motul de San Jose, uncarbonized remains are typically indicative of modern disturbance. These samples were sorted in the Florid a Museum of Natural History Paleobotany laboratory, initially under the supervision of Wyatt. Carbonized plant materials as well as seeds, both uncarbonized and carbonized, were separated from the uncarbonized plant materials. Carbonized plant remains were further subdivided into hardwoods, pine, palm, resinous materials, and unidentifiable carbon. Quantification : Macrobotanical Remains Quantification of macrobotanical remains was limited to counts of the identified taxa by provenience. This is standard pr actice in Mesoamerica, as recovery rates are typically low (Morehart 2002; Wyatt 2008b) For more information about quantification of macrobotanical mater ials see Pearsall (2000), Wright (2010), and Morehart (2002). Analysis of the Datasets: Faunal Materials Archaeological S ampling : Faunal Materials Faunal remains were gathered by the MSJ Project and curated in the Florida Museum of Natural History Environ mental Archaeology Program. Animal remains were recovered from all excavations done at the site of Motul de San Jose. Remains while those from special deposits used either fine gauge screen sampling (1/4, 1/8, 1/16 th th The majority of these remains were identified by, or under supervision of, Emery (specifically remains from MSJ household middens and occupation surfaces, and some

PAGE 43

43 deposits adjacent to the proposed marketplace), using the FLMNH EAP comparative collections. Of particular interest to this project is a large collection of faunal materials collected from the structures adjacent to the Plaza II proposed marketplace and Thornton. Thornton identified the screened fractions of these materials. Identification : Faunal Materials I completed identification of th e remaining materials associated with the Plaza II proposed marketplace and its adjacent middens (unidentified samples from operations 2A and all unscreened materials from operation 46A). I also analyzed portions of assemblages from household middens in th and 42D, E, and H). All identifications used the FLMNH EAP comparative collections and were supervised by Emery. The portion of the faunal assemblage that I identified was combined with the larger dataset of faun al material that had been identified and analyzed by Emery. Quantification : Faunal Materials Faunal materials were quantified using the number of identified specimens (NISP). Using NISP allowed for greater comparability with the botanical datasets, as the y were quantified using NISP, though NISP tallies do have the potential to overrepresent species with large numbers of identifiable elements. If fragments of the same element from the same provenience could be refitted, they were counted as an NISP of 1, t hus reducing the risk that the same animal might be counted multiple times. A nalysis of the Datasets: Combined Remains The combined analysis was a qualitative integration, in which each dataset has been calculated separately. Quantitative integration wou ld have required that all three

PAGE 44

44 datasets be as comparable as possible, and due to time and financial constraints, there were far fewer botanical samples analyzed than faunal remains. An additional difficulty in combining quantitative analysis is that frequ ently used measures for faunal analysis, such as MNI, are not possible with botanical materials. So for this study, each test was done individually for each dataset, and the results are compared across datasets in a qualitative fashion. In a third step, these results were correlated to settlement and soils data already and trace metals (Cu, Fe, Mn, Pb, and Zn) provided information about activity areas in the Plaza II area, as well as on the floors of elite residences (In Press). Investigations into the structures around Plaza II suggest that one of the structures was potentially used as a workshop for the production of elaborately painted polychrome vessels (Halperin and Foias In Press) The settlement around the site center was documented by surveying three transects, which identified minor ce nters located approximately 2 to 3km outside of the site core (Moriarty 2004) This information provided a framework within which t o consider the botanical and faunal datasets. Finally, I use this combined data both to define appropriate methods for recovery and testing of each dataset, suggesting a protocol for analyses of combined environmental archaeology data, and to test the mo del of marketplace activities within Plaza II. The analysis of combined data equivalently quantified datasets. Faunal materials will be quantified using MNI and NISP. Because of the poor preservation of macrobotanical remains from the site of Motul de San Jose, quantification of these materials focused on absolute counts (NISP) and weights. The datasets overlap

PAGE 45

45 whenever possible, so as to provide multiple types of information for each provenience. See Appendix 2 for detailed provenience information for each sample. Statement of Biases Unfortunately, large portions of the site have been deforested in the past 10 years for milpa agriculture, which increases the likelihood of incorporation of modern agricultural plant materials working into the soil by farming activities and bioturbation. These same processes may also disturb the deposition of other archaeological materials, such as the faunal remains. For botanical materials especially, the shallow bedrock, typically 20 30cm below ground level, makes it even m ore difficult to determine with certainty whether plant materials are archaeological. A forest fire that burned the area in 1999 that may have been hot enough to burn roots deep in the ground, contaminating the archaeological record with modern carbonized and charred material. Modern carbonized materials are difficult to distinguish from archaeological plant materials. There is a lot of variability in durability between taxa, with the highly durable cobs and kernels of maize likely overrepresented in the archaeological record while more delicate plant materials do not survive at all. The same can be said for faunal materials, with delicate bones such as fish likely not surviving taphonomic processes over time. Additionally, some economically important plan ts are entirely or almost entirely consumed during use, such as beans ( Phaseolus sp.), making them susceptible to underrepresentation in the archaeological record. Production of phytoliths varies widely amongst taxa, with some families being notoriously he avy producers (such as Musaceae (bananas), Poaceae (grasses), and Aracaceae (palms), among others), while others that likely would have been growing around Motul de San Jose produce

PAGE 46

46 phytoliths only rarely or not at all (Chenopodiaceae ( goosefoot family, in cludes quinoa and several weedy taxa ) and Solanaceae (peppers and tomatoes), among others) (Piperno 2006). Testing Biases and Strengths of Environmental Datasets The first goal of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of analyzing the combined envi ronmental archaeology datasets. Each of these datasets has its own inherent biases and strengths so each was tested individually to determine preservation status and analytical utility. Preservation was quantified using measures of total and relative numbe r of identifiable specimens as well as the level to which the specimens could be identified. I also consider the proportion of each sample that is fragmented or highly eroded, or otherwise severely modified by taphonomic processes, such as burning in the case of the faunal materials. Fragmentation, the result of physical stress such as trampling, primarily affects the macrobotanical and faunal materials, and is exceedingly rare in phytoliths. Phytoliths are prone to erosion from chemical weathering process es, such as the leaching of water through alkaline sediments. Erosion tends to leave pock mark like scars on phytoliths, eventually rendering them unidentifiable. Values are compared between deposit types and between deposits within each type, such as the distribution across the plaza or between households. The number of identifiable specimens (NISP) is used for all comparative analyses of preservation and taphonomic status because NISP can be calculated for micro and macrobotanicals as well as faunal mater ials. An important component of this study is determining which datasets or combinations of datasets have the most analytical utility for studying natural resource use and distribution at a lowland Maya archaeological site. Using my information on

PAGE 47

47 preserv ation, taphonomy and intrusion, I have evaluated the strengths of each dataset for understanding different types of deposits, such as middens and plaza contexts. Predictions of the Marketplace Model The second goal of this study is the evaluation of the ma rketplace hypothesis put forth by Bair and Terry in their forthcoming publication (In Press) I have looked for differences in the v ariety and abundance of taxa between the proposed marketplace and other parts of the site, as well as for differentiation within sections of the marketplace. Soil chemistry analysis revealed that the central portion of the proposed market plaza has elevat ed phosphate levels, which are thought to be a result of food items being traded or consumed in that area (Bair and Terry In Press) I predict that plant remains, particularly the microscopic ones, will follow this pattern if the space was indeed used as a marketplace. Phytoliths and macroremains represent plant remains that have been deposited very near to where the producing plant de composed, which makes them useful for detecting patterns in a plaza that might be representative of marketplace organization. Macroremains, as with animal remains, are often removed in regular cleaning of the plaza so I do not expect these remains to be as good a proxy for space use as are the microscopic remains. However, I do expect to find differential distributions of the macroremains alongside the plaza in association with either waste deposits or edge zone residues (Hayden and Cannon 1983) The structures surrounding the plaza sh ow evidence for crafting and specialized production. Operation 46, to the east, shows evidence for the specialized production of figurines (Halperin In Press) To the south of the plaza, operation 2 shows evidence for being an elite home and polychrome workshop (Foias, et al. In Press; Halperin and Foias In Press) And to

PAGE 48

48 the north of the pla za, there was evidence of a domestic group and some feasting, with high concentrations of P, which would indicate the presence of organic matter (Bair and Terry In Press) I also anticipated finding plant and animal remains representative of different activities in the household middens versus the marketplace samples. One expected outcome of marketplace activities would be a higher di versity of activities and material remains of those activities within a marketplace than within any one household. Therefore, if the marketplace model is correct, I would expect that the combined samples from Plaza II (the proposed marketplace) will be com prised of a greater diversity of taxa than any one midden. Diversity of faunal materials was calculated using the Shannon Weaver function, which considers the distribution of abundance between taxa, such that assemblages with higher numbers of taxa as well as more evenly distributed taxa are shown as having a higher diversity than a sample with the same number of taxa but with less equitability in distribution (Peres 2010) The relative proportion of economically useful plants a nd animals will be considered for the different contexts across the site, as will the relative proportion of ritually valued taxa. If Plaza II were only used as a market, then it should not have any higher values of ritual taxa than would the household mid dens, however if it was where public space rituals were carried out, it would likely have a higher density of ritually important taxa. Likewise, if the plaza were a marketplace I would not expect to find any higher status materials than the average for the household middens, but if the plaza was used exclusively for elite economy activities, I would expect to find proportionately much higher quantities of high status goods, such as long distance trade items or exotic

PAGE 49

49 taxa. Following Emery (2003) ritual taxa were defined as crocodile and jaguar, and exotic taxa are those that are clearly imported from the coast; stingray and marine shell. These classifications are based on consistent correlations between such species, and ritual and elite contexts (for exampl e, see various chapters in Emery 2004; also Emery pers. comm.; Teeter 2001; Thornton 2011).

PAGE 50

50 CHAPTER 3 RESULTS Macrobotanicals Taxonomic Results For this study, 58 of the 190 macrobotanical samples were analyzed. A total of 814 specimens were identified ( see Appendix 2). Seven taxa were identified: general hardwoods, Pinus sp. (pine wood), Aracaceae (palm), Zea mays (maize), Fabaceae (legumes, including beans), Vitaceae (large family including grapes), and Chenopodiaceae (goosefoot family, includes quinoa and several weedy taxa). Of these taxa, the seeds of Fabaceae, Vitaceae, and Chenopodiaceae were uncarbonized, and are thus considered indicative of the presence of modern intrusions in 18 of the 59 samples (see discussion of intrusions below ). The most a bundant taxa recovered was hardwood, followed by pine, chenopod seeds, and palm wood (Table 3 1). Preservation (Identifiability and Taphonomic A lterations) 32 of the 58 (55%) samples that were analyzed contained remains identifiable to the level of order ( Table 3 3). The lowest level at which identifications could be made was to species. 0.48% of the specimens could be identified to species (all Zea mays) Not all of these remains were carbonized and are therefore not considered archaeological specimens. 25 of the identified specimens (3.07%) were uncarbonized seeds (Table 3 1). Large portions of the carbonized remains by NISP (67%) were highly fragmented and were only identifiable as wood charcoal or carbon (Tables 3 3 and 3 4). However, this may be a bias of quantifying by NISP, because despite accounting for less than 30% by NISP, the remains that can be identified more specifically equal 40% of the macrobotanical assemblage by weight. Some of the carbon was very fragile and

PAGE 51

51 shattered easily during analysi s, thus introducing a bias toward large quantities of unidentifiable wood carbon by NISP. Intrusion In 18 of 59 samples, the seeds of Fabaceae, Vitaceae, and Chenopodiaceae were uncarbonized, and indicate intrusion including six samples that also include pine. Samples that include both pine and modern intrusions could indicate a high level of bioturbation or other disturbances. Samples including both pine and modern taxa include one sample from operation 2A (Group C, over bench surface in the NE quadrant), two from Group B (12B, behind the south structure and 12D, along the Northern edge of the Plaza), one from 29B (shovel test at the south edge of the Plaza of group B/E), and two from 31A, a horizontal excavation of a large structure in the North Zone of t he site. There did not appear to be any pattern between the samples that had pine that also had modern intrusions versus those samples with pine and no intrusions. Marketplace Testing The diversity of plant species recovered in the macrobotanical samples is low, likely due to generally poor preservation of organic materials across the site. The robust hard woods, which would be relatively resistant to post depositional degradation, not surprisingly comprise the majority of the macrobotanical materials that were identified. Unfortunately the hardwood fragments were all too small to identify more specifically. Pine wood was recovered in ten of the samples, which is significant because it would not have been locally grown, so its presence indicates with certai nty that the samples are archaeological in nature. The presence of pine in ten of the 58 samples indicates that the pine was intentionally brought in from afar because pine does not grow at the site or in the

PAGE 52

52 immediate vicinity now, nor is it likely to have in the past. This suggests both that the samples can confidently considered to be archaeological, and that the residents of the site were engaged in long distance trade. The pine may have been growing in the savannas south of Lake Petn Itza, though i t is possible that it was harvested from a source further away, such as from the Maya Mountains in Belize or the highland areas. The presence of hard wood material in nearly half of the analyzed samples (n=27) could indicate that the residents of Motul d e San Jose had access to forested areas. Many of the recovered hard wood fragments were very small in nature, and thus were not identifiable more specifically than to hardwoods. It is possible that the small fragments of hard wood indicate that the trees a vailable to the residents were smaller, possibly representing secondary growth or disturbance species. Samples recovered from the Plaza II area yielded a higher NISP per sample than did samples recovered from household middens (Table 3 5). Household midd en samples did not include maize or pine carbon, whereas one piece of carbonized maize cob was found in a Plaza sample and two pieces of pine carbon were found in a different Plaza sample. The maize was found in a unit bordering the Acropolis, while the pi ne was found on the western edge of the plaza, in operation 29B. All of the macrobotanical samples from the plaza area were collected in operations 2, 29, and 46, however, samples collected from a structure on the Western edge of the plaza (operation 46) d id not yield any carbonized botanical remains. Most of the identified carbon was collected in operation 29, reflecting the higher number of macrobotanical samples analyzed from that structure (seven samples were analyzed from operation 29, as compared with five from the other structures, three of which were from operation 46

PAGE 53

53 and contained no carbon at all). Macrobotanical samples from the Plaza II excavations demonstrated a higher total number of taxa represented, as well as a higher mean number of taxa ide ntified per sample (Table 3 6). However, the range of variability in the number of taxa identified was also much higher in the plaza area than in the household midden samples. When uncarbonized (and likely modern intrusive) materials are excluded, the tota l number of taxa is reduced to 4: hardwoods, Aracaceae, Pinus sp., and Zea mays Only Aracaceae and hardwoods were found in the household midden samples, however the household midden samples had a higher mean NISP (Table 3 7). The diversity index for the macrobotanical samples was generally low. The plaza samples had a slightly higher diversity index than the household midden samples (Table 3 6 and Table 3 7). Evenness was quite low for both the plaza and the household midden samples, with the evenness of the plaza samples being half that of the household middens. Both the diversity and the evenness values for the macrobotanical samples were skewed by relatively large amounts of unidentifiable carbonized wood tissue. Very few economically, medicinally, o r ritually significant plant materials were recovered in the macrobotanical samples. Economically significant taxa include P in us sp ., Zea mays and fabaceae. Ritually significant and exotic goods are both represented only by pine carbon (NISP=2). The signif icant taxa were found in the Plaza II samples but not the household midden samples (Table 3 9). Phytoliths Taxonomic Results Processing the samples for phytoliths alone resulted in much clearer slides than those produced in the dual recovery method attem pted by Dubbin (see above). Only a

PAGE 54

54 few slides contained residual organic material (n=5). Samples from all contexts contained phytoliths, however, relatively few identifiable phytoliths were recovered overall. Identified taxa include Heliconia sp., Poaceae (grass family), Zea mays (maize), Asteraceae (daisy family, includes sunflowers), Annonaceae (flowering plants, some of which produce edible fruits), Cucurbita pepo (domesticated squash), and Musa sp. (bananas) (see Appendix 2). The slides also contained p hytoliths that are not diagnostic to any level, as well as diatoms, which are the silt sized silicaceous casings of algae. Because some plants produce multiple phytolith types, and some phytolith types are produced in a variety of different plants, there i s a wide range of specificity in phytolith identifications. Most of the phytoliths found on the slides were not identifiable to the family level or better. In the case of Poaceae and Zea mays some phytoliths are diagnostic to the species level, but there is also the possibility that some of the phytoliths identified simply to Poaceae were produced by Zea mays Phytoliths representing the grass family (including possible maize) were the most abundant, comprising just over 10% of the total phytolith assembla ge. The next most abundant taxa was diagnostic to the daisy family, but these phytoliths were less than half as abundant as grasses, at 4.05% of the total phytolith assemblage (Table 3 9). Preservation (I dentifiabil ity and Taphonomic A lterations) The samp les from Plaza II contained the highest number of identifiable phytoliths, averaging 18 per slide, out of an average 102 total phytoliths per slide. The midden samples had the least, averaging three identifiable phytoliths per slide out of an average of 68 total phytoliths. The midden samples that were especially high in carbonate material from plaster floors were particularly low in phytoliths, with one sample only containing 24 phytoliths, none of which were identifiable. These results are not

PAGE 55

55 surprising considering that alkaline soils are known to degrade phytoliths. The midden samples showed the most severe signs of erosion, with 53% (n=219) of the phytoliths found on the slides demonstrating severe enough erosion that they could not be identified in any way. The phytoliths recovered from Plaza II were less eroded, with just 31% (n=385) of the phytoliths appearing too eroded to identify. It seems that the unique depositional context of the household middens is especially destructive to phytoliths. The lo west level at which identifications could be made was to species. 0.81% of the specimens could be identified to species ( Zea mays and Cucurbita pepo ). Large quantities of phytoliths (603, 36.86%) were highly eroded and thus could not be identified (Table 3 11). Still more phytoliths ( 761, 46.52%) were not diagnostic to any level (Table 3 10). Phytoliths that could be identified below the level of order were identified either to the level of family (242, 14.79%) or species (Table 3 10). Intrusion The relat ive abundance and diversity of phytoliths recovered from Plaza II may be indicative of post contact agricultural activity or trash deposition activities in the plaza area, although there is no other direct evidence of such activities (Foias, personal commu nication). The presence of Musa sp. phytoliths in one of the plaza samples supports this hypothesis, as all species in the Musaceae family are Old World taxa that were introduced to Mesoamerica upon European contact. There is no easy way to accurately dete rmine the age of phytoliths recovered from archaeological sediments. The most secure method for dating phytoliths is AMS radiocarbon dating, which can only be done on phytoliths that contain inclusions of carbon. However, none of the phytoliths recovered f rom Motul de San Jose contained inclusions of carbon. Because they cannot be easily dated, not to mention that phytoliths are silt sized and thus are

PAGE 56

56 easily redistributed in the soil matrix, analysts should be careful to collect phytolith samples only from secure archaeological contexts. Middens or plaster floors are ideal in this regard. The security of the Plaza II samples is further complicated by the abundance of rhizomatic taxa found in the plaza. Rhizomes are subterranean root tissue that spread horiz ontally underground and can produce new roots and vertical shoots, potentially introducing phytoliths from surface plants into the lower strata. Rhizomatic taxa found in the phytolith assemblage include some species of Poaceae, some species of Asteraceae, Heliconia sp., and Musa sp. Because of the shallow soil lenses, soil samples were collected at approximately 20cm below the surface. This would not be deep enough to prevent the accidental inclusion of modern rhizome matter in the soil sample. Phytoliths c an be highly abundant in rhizomes, so the inclusion of even a small amount of modern rhizome tissue may skew the results (Piperno 2006) Marketplace T esting Plaza II had the largest number of different taxa (see Table 3 13). All seven taxa identified in the phytoliths were found in Plaza II samples, in addition to eroded phytoliths and diatoms. The midden samples only recovered three different taxa. Five of the six samples that contained domesticates were from Plaza II samples, with onl y one phytolith representing a domesticated species ( Zea mays ) found in one of the transect samples (East Transect, 1600m). Cucurbitaceae and Annonaceae were found exclusively in the plaza area. The disturbance taxa Poaceae and Asteraceae were relatively u biquitous in samples from across the site. There was not a substantial difference in diversity of taxa between the plaza II samples and the household midden samples. The Shannon Weaver diversity index for the plaza II samples was 1.12, compared to 1.02 f or the household midden samples

PAGE 57

57 (Table 3 15). There was a substantial difference in the evenness of the taxonomic distribution between the plaza samples and the midden samples, with the plaza receiving a very low evenness score of 0.01, and the middens rec eiving a still low, but substantially higher 0.14 (Table 3 15). The evenness of the plaza II samples was distorted by the presence of a very large quantity (n=143) of Poaceae phytoliths, which are common intrusions in archaeological samples (Pearsall 2000) Very few economically, medicinally, or ritually significant plant materials were recovered in the phytolith samples. Economically significant taxa include domesticated maize and squash (NISP=10) (Tabl e 3 16). Ritually significant taxa are represented only by maize, which could have been used ritualistically, or it may have also been simply a subsistence good. See Anderson 2010, Christenson 2010, and LeCount 2001 for examples of ritual use of corn foods and drinks during feasting in the Maya area. Exotic taxa include only Musa sp., which, although quite exotic, is not archaeological since it was most definitely introduced to the region post contact. All of these significant taxa were found in the Plaza I I samples (Table 3 16). Phytolith Analysis from Other C ontexts Soil samples from the eastern transect were also processed for phytoliths. The six transect samples that were processed for phytoliths were highly reactive during oxidation stages of process ing, indicating large quantities of organic material in the samples. However, phytolith preservation in these samples was not good, and with approximately 44 identifiable phytoliths per slide from the east transect samples. The vast majority of identifiabl e phytoliths (86%) were from the family Poaceae, which may include Zea mays but also includes other grasses, a result that is consistent with the

PAGE 58

58 phytolith from Zea mays ind icating the presence of maize cultivation in the east transect at sample E1600, close to the site core, but was also one of the samples that demonstrated evidence for relatively recent maize cultivation. Geochemical residue analysis was done on floor sampl es collected from two different elite residences. One of these residences was also tested for phytoliths. The floors of the residence in Structure 8L 6 were very clean, and the low levels of extractable P and metal, would indicate that these floors were pr obably kept clean in ancient times as well (Bair and Terry In Press) The two phytolith samples that were processed from this struct ure were the two with the least number of phytoliths recovered from the entire site. In addition to being from a floor that was quite clean, these two samples had two of the three highest pH values of all the samples recovered (pH 8.2 and 8.0), due in lar ge part to the highly carbonate nature of stucco floors. While it is possible that phytoliths had been left behind when the floors were swept clean of visible debris, the alkaline floor matrix is destructive to phytoliths, so recovery was nonetheless quite poor. 44 phytoliths were recovered from this structure, three of which were identifiable, all to the family Poaceae. Fauna Taxonomic R esults White tailed deer ( Odocoileus virginianus ) was the most common species found at the site. Deer comprised 15.69% of the overall faunal assemblage (Table 3 17). Psoronaias sp. (river clam) was the second most abundant taxa at the site, but is far less abundant than deer, at about 4.82% of the faunal assemblage (Table 3 17). The third and fourth most abundant species a re also freshwater mollusks, Pomacea flagellata (apple snail) and Pachychilus indiorum (jute). These freshwater mollusks can

PAGE 59

59 be used as a supplementary source of protein, or their shells can be burned and used as a source of lime (Emery (In Press); Healy et al. 1991; Moholy Nagy 1978; Nations 1979) Testudines (turtles) and Dasypus novemcinctus (armadillos) were almost as abundant as the freshwater gastropods. Both of these species produce numerous bony plates that may result in their over representation in the archaeological record. Rodents of the assemblage may include agoutis, pacas, and pocket gophers, all of which are food species. Smaller rodents may have been intrusive, howeve r no rodents of this size were found in the sub sampled assemblage from household middens or the plaza II area. Preservation (Identifiability and Taxonomic A lterations) Identification of the faunal materials was more specific than the botanical materials in part because of the more durable nature of osseous tissue and also that the relatively large size aids in field recovery and collection. In a sub sample of the faunal assemblage that contains specimens collected in household middens and the plaza II a rea, the lowest level at which identifications could be made was to species. 24.34% of the specimens could be identified to species (Table 3 18). Despite the fact that more than half of the specimens were considered fragmented or eroded (Table 3 19), most of the specimens were not too fragmented to identify to the level of class (52.40%) or better (Table 3 18). Intrusion No clearly intrusive or post contact species were found in the sub sampled assemblage of faunal materials from the Plaza II area and h ousehold middens. Other contexts at the site contained the remains of small rodents, which are likely intrusive

PAGE 60

60 remains. It is possible that some of the small mammal remains found in the Plaza II area and household are of intrusive rodents. Marketplace T es ting There were several species that were found only in the royal palace/acropolis context of operation 2A or 46A. These included conch (Strombidae), opossum ( Didelphis virginianus ) crocodile ( crocodylus sp.) and jaguar ( Panthera onca ). The conch and cro codile would have had to be imported from coastal areas, and the jaguar is highly symbolically valuable, so it is not unexpected to find higher quantities of these species in the high status structures. Operations 2A and 46A also include the Plaza II excav ations, so these highly valued taxa were from contexts that were not a part of the proposed marketplace, but located very near it. The polychrome ceramic deposit located adjacent to Plaza II in the royal palace/acropolis complex was designated as Buildings surrounding a proposed marketplace area, especially those involved in specialized craft production, may well have been actively involved in marketplace exchange. Diversity was calculated using the Shannon Weaver function (see above). Overlappi ng taxa were rejected 1 The diversity scores for the faunal materials show higher diversity amongst the household middens than in the plaza II excavations (Table 3 20). The difference in diversity indices between the middens and the plaza excavations is mo derate, and may be caused in part by the much higher abundance of 1 This does create consistency problems when comparing with the phytolith assemblage. Eliminating overlappi ng taxa in the phytolith assemblage is problematic because overlapping diagnostic types are not related to taphonomic processes or issues of recovery, as in faunal analysis. For example, the complete assemblage of phytoliths from one maize plant will conta in phytoliths that can be identified as plant, produced by other plants, likewise those identified as Poaceae will be identical to those produced in other Poaceae. I suspect this is one reason why phytoliths are not typically quantified in this way.

PAGE 61

61 faunal materials recovered from the household midden excavations. Household midden samples also had a higher mean NISP per sample (Table 3 21), though the range of variability in total NISP was much higher than the plaza II samples as well, due to there being a number of midden contexts that were extremely abundant in faunal materials. Economically, medicinally, or ritually significant taxa were also more abundant in the household midden sa mples than in the Plaza II excavations (Table 3 23). Economic significance was based on those species that were commonly used for food (Teeter 2004, Emery 2004). Medicinally significant taxa included turtle, paca, armadillo, rabbit and opossum, following t he ethnographic information from the Itzaj Maya (Emery 2008). Ritually significant taxa included crocodile and jaguar (Emery 2003) Exotic taxa included marine shell and stingray spi nes, which would have been imported from coastal areas through long distance trade networks (Emery 2003; Thornton 2011) No exotic goods or ritually significant goods were recovered from plaza II contexts, and very few were recovered from household middens (Table 3 23). Economically significant taxa were recovered in proportionally similar quantities from both contexts (Table 3 23). A habitat fidelity test was done comparing both t he totals from the site as a whole and the household middens and the Plaza II excavations. The habitat fidelity test, derived from the faunal materials, serves as a proxy for the abundance of habitat types that were being utilized by the residents of the s ite. The habitat fidelity test for the overall site of Motul de San Jose showed that a large proportion of the fauna recovered from the site prefer secondary forest growth habitats (43%), followed closely by a preference for agricultural habitats (39%) (Ta ble 3 24). Mature forest species comprised

PAGE 62

62 nearly 16% of the total assemblage, and 14% and 15% of the midden and Plaza II samples, respectively. The results of the habitat fidelity test are very similar across the different contexts at the site.

PAGE 63

63 Table 3 1. Macrobotanical materials by t axa NISP % of Assemblage Taxonomic Plant Name Description of Plant Part 165 20.27% Hardwood Carbon 29 3.56% Pinus sp. Carbon 19 2.33% Chenopod Uncarbonized Seed 11 1.35% Aracaceae Carbon 4 0.49% Zea mays Carbonized Cob 3 0.37% Chenopod Uncarbonized Seed Pod 2 0.25% Fabaceae Uncarbonized Seed 1 0.12% Vitaceae Uncarbonized Seed Table 3 2. Carbonized taxa from household middens and p laza II samples Taxa Midden (NISP) Plaza (NISP) Total(NISP) Aracaceae 1 2 3 Hardwo od 38 45 3 Pinus sp. 0 2 2 Zea mays 0 1 1 Total 39 50 9 Table 3 3. Level of identifiability of macrobotanical m aterials Context Identified to species Identified to genus Identified to family Identified to class Identified to order or higher Unide ntifiable Total Midden 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (1.49%) 0 (0%) 54 (80.60%) 12 (17.91%) 67 Plaza II 1 (0.48%) 2 (0.96%) 5 (2.40%) 0 (0%) 122 (58.65%) 78 (37.50%) 208 Table 3 4. Percentage of identifiable macrobotanical r emains Context Fragmented/Eroded (NISP) Percentage Fragmented or Eroded Total Midden 28 41.79% 67 Plaza II 155 74.52% 208 183 66.55% 275 Table 3 5. Variability of abundance of all macrobotanical r emains Provenience Total NISP Number of Samples Mean NISP per Sample Range of Varia bility Midden 67 7 9.6 0 37 Plaza II 208 13 15.3 0 55 Total 275 20 13.8 0 55

PAGE 64

64 Table 3 6. Variability of taxonomic distribution of all macrobotanical r emains Provenience Total NISP Total Number of Taxa Mean Number of Taxa per Sample Range of Variability Midden 67 4 1.4 0 3 Plaza II 208 7 2.8 0 7 Total 275 9 2.13 0 7 Table 3 7. Variability of abundance and taxonomic distribution of carbonized botanical r emains Provenience Total NISP Number of Samples Mean NISP per Sample Range of Variability Total Number of Taxa Mean Number of Taxa per Sample Range of Variability Midden 39 7 5.6 0 25 2 0.7 0 1 Plaza II 50 13 3.8 0 17 4 0.9 0 4 Total 89 20 4.5 0 25 4 0.85 0 4 Table 3 8. Diversity and evenness of all m acrobotan ical r ema ins Taxa Plaza Middens Plaza Middens Aracaceae 2 1 0.05 0.06 Dicot Wood 77 21 0.37 0.36 Hardwood 45 38 0.33 0.32 Spermatophyte 74 7 0.37 0.24 Chenopodiaceae 2 0.05 Fabaceae 1 0.03 Zea mays 1 0.03 Pinus sp. 2 0.05 Total NISP 2 04 67 Taxa Count 8 4 Shannon Weaver 1.26 0.98 Evenness 0.02 0.04 Table 3 9. Significant macrobotanical r emains Context Economically Significant Medicinally Significant Ritually Significant Exotic Goods Total Midden 20 0.00% 0 0.00% 18 5. 25% 18 5.25% 343 Plaza II 4 1.92% 0 0.00% 2 0.96% 2 0.96% 208

PAGE 65

65 Table 3 10. Microbotanical materials by t axa Taxonomic Plant Name Number % of Assemblage Poaceae 217 10.33% Asteraceae 85 4.05% Diatom 31 1.48% Heliconia sp. 14 0.67% Zea mays 10 0.4 8% Musa sp. (leaf) 3 0.14% Annonaceae 2 0.10% Cucurbita pepo 1 0.05% Table 3 11. Level of identifiability of microbotanical r emains Context Identified to species Identified to genus Identified to family Identified to class Identified to order or high er Unidentifiable Total Midden 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 41 (10.05%) 0 (0%) 145 (35.54%) 218 (53.43%) 408 Plaza II 10 (0.81%) 0 (0%) 201 (16.37%) 0 (0%) 616 (50.16%) 385 (31.35%) 1228 10 (0.81%) 0 (0%) 242 (14.79%) 0 (0%) 761 (46.52%) 603 (36.86%) 1636 Ta ble 3 12. Percentage of identifiable p hytoliths Context Fragmented/Eroded (NISP) Percentage Fragmented or Eroded Total Midden 218 53.43% 408 Plaza II 385 31.35% 1228 603 36.86% 1636 Table 3 13. Variability of abundance of p hytoliths Provenience Total NISP Total Number of Taxa Mean Number of Taxa per Sample Range of Variability Midden 408 5 4 2 5 Plaza II 1228 9 6.5 4 9 1636 9 4.61 2 9 Table 3 14. Variability of taxonomic distribution of p hytoliths Provenience Total NISP Number of Samp les Mean NISP per Sample Range of Variability Midden 408 6 68.0 20 162 Plaza II 1228 12 102.3 16 259 1636 18 90.9 16 259

PAGE 66

66 Table 3 15. Diversity and evenness of microbotanical r emains Taxa Plaza Middens Plaza Middens Asteraceae 44 10 0.32 0.35 Poaceae 143 5 0.29 0.35 Diatom 16 4 0.19 0.32 Anonaceae 14 1 0.17 Zea mays 9 0.13 Cucurbita pepo 1 0.02 Total NISP 227 20 Taxa Count 6 4 Shannon Weaver 1.12 1.02 Evenness 0.01 0.14 Table 3 16. Significant phytolith t axa Con text Economically Significant Medicinally Significant Ritually Significant Exotic Goods Total Midden 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 408 Plaza II 10 0.81% 0 0.00% 9 0.73% 2 0.16% 1228

PAGE 67

67 Table 1 17. Relative abundance of faunal t axa from the P laza II area and select household middens.. Taxa Plaza II Household Middens Total N % N % N % Mammalia 112 0.376 127 0.155 239 0.213 Mammalia, large 53 0.178 176 0.214 229 0.204 Odocoileus virginianus 29 0.097 92 0.112 121 0.108 Mamma lia, intermediate 10 0.034 84 0.102 94 0.084 Dermatemys mawii 2 0.007 84 0.102 86 0.077 Vertebrata 1 0.003 75 0.091 76 0.068 Gastropoda 16 0.054 15 0.018 31 0.028 Unionidae 10 0.034 12 0.015 22 0.020 Pomacea flagellata 10 0.034 11 0.013 21 0.019 Test udines 3 0.010 15 0.018 18 0.016 Canis familiaris 1 0.003 13 0.016 14 0.013 Osteichthyes 14 0.047 0 0.000 14 0.013 Canis 9 0.030 3 0.004 12 0.011 Cervidae 6 0.020 5 0.006 11 0.010 Psoronaias sp. 5 0.017 6 0.007 11 0.010 Mazama americana 3 0.010 6 0.0 07 9 0.008 Trachemys scripta 0 0.000 8 0.010 8 0.007 Mammalia, small 1 0.003 6 0.007 7 0.006 Sylvilagus floridanus 0 0.000 7 0.009 7 0.006 Carnivora 3 0.010 2 0.002 5 0.004 Didelphis virginianus 0 0.000 4 0.005 4 0.004 Emydidae 0 0.000 4 0.005 4 0.00 4 Gastropoda, marine 1 0.003 3 0.004 4 0.004 Sylvilagus sp. 1 0.003 3 0.004 4 0.004 Canidae 0 0.000 3 0.004 3 0.003 Didelphis sp. 0 0.000 3 0.004 3 0.003 Mammalia, small/intermediate 0 0.000 3 0.004 3 0.003 Mollusca, marine 0 0.000 3 0.004 3 0.003 P assiformes 0 0.000 3 0.004 3 0.003 Strombidae 1 0.003 2 0.002 3 0.003 Testudines, pitted, small 0 0.000 3 0.004 3 0.003 Agouti paca 1 0.003 1 0.001 2 0.002 Aves, intermediate 1 0.003 1 0.001 2 0.002 Aves, large 0 0.000 2 0.002 2 0.002 Aves, small 0 0 .000 2 0.002 2 0.002 Conch 0 0.000 2 0.002 2 0.002 Dasypus noveminctus 0 0.000 2 0.002 2 0.002 Mammalia, intermediate/large 0 0.000 2 0.002 2 0.002 Orthalicus princeops 2 0.007 0 0.000 2 0.002 Pachylus sp. 0 0.000 2 0.002 2 0.002 Panthera onca 0 0.00 0 2 0.002 2 0.002 Rodentia, small 1 0.003 1 0.001 2 0.002 Sauria 0 0.000 2 0.002 2 0.002 Tapiris rouline 0 0.000 2 0.002 2 0.002 Testudines, pitted 0 0.000 2 0.002 2 0.002 Artiodactyla 1 0.003 0 0.000 1 0.001 Aves, intermediate/large 0 0.000 1 0.001 1 0.001 Crocodylus sp. 0 0.000 1 0.001 1 0.001 Dasyprocta punctata 0 0.000 1 0.001 1 0.001 Didelphidae 0 0.000 1 0.001 1 0.001 Felidae, large 0 0.000 1 0.001 1 0.001

PAGE 68

68 Table 3 17 Continued Taxa Plaza II Household Middens Total N % N % N % Helicin ia amonea 1 0.003 0 0.000 1 0.001 Invertebrata 0 0.000 1 0.001 1 0.001 Kinosternidae 0 0.000 1 0.001 1 0.001 Meleagrididae 0 0.000 1 0.001 1 0.001 Meleagris gallopavo 0 0.000 1 0.001 1 0.001 Muridae/Heteromyidae 0 0.000 1 0.001 1 0.001 Oliva sayana 0 0.000 1 0.001 1 0.001 Pachychilus glaphyrus 0 0.000 1 0.001 1 0.001 Pachychilus indiorum 0 0.000 1 0.001 1 0.001 Phasianidae 0 0.000 1 0.001 1 0.001 Sciuridae 0 0.000 1 0.001 1 0.001 Tayassuidae 0 0.000 2 0.002 2 0.002 Urcyon cineoargenteus 0 0.000 1 0.001 1 0.001 Totals 298 822 1120 Table 3 18. Level of identifiability of faunal m aterial Context Identified to species Identified to genus Identified to family Identified to class Identified to order or higher Unidentifiable Total Midden 245 (27.25%) 21 (2.34%) 35 (3.89%) 434 (48.28%) 26 (2.89%) 138 (15.35%) 899 Plaza II 49 (15.86%) 15 (4.85%) 17 (5.50%) 199 (64.40%) 22 (7.12%) 7 (2.27%) 309 294 (24.34%) 36 (2.98%) 52 (4.30%) 633 (52.40%) 48 (3.97%) 145 (12.00%) 1208 Table 3 19. Percen tage of fragmented or eroded faunal m aterials Context Fragmented/Eroded (NISP) Percentage Fragmented or Eroded Total Midden 675 75.08% 899 Plaza II 164 53.07% 309 839 69.45% 1208 Table 3 20. Diversity and evenness of faunal m aterials Context Shan non Weaver Diversity Evenness Midden 2.69 0.02 Plaza II 2.08 0.03 Table 3 21. Variability of abundance of faunal m aterials Provenience Total NISP Number of Samples Mean NISP per Sample Range of Variability Midden 899 46 19.5 1 141 Plaza II 309 38 8.1 1 52 1208 84 14.4 1 141

PAGE 69

69 Table 3 22. Variability in taxonomic distribution of faunal m aterials Provenience Total NISP Total Number of Taxa Mean Number of Taxa per Sample Range of Variability Midden 899 69 5 1 14 Plaza II 309 33 3 1 7 1208 6 8 5.93 1 14 Table 3 23. Significant f auna Context Economic Medicinal Ritual Exotic Goods Total Midden 169 18.80% 132 14.68% 4 0.44% 11 1.22% 899 Plaza II 48 15.53% 8 2.59% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 309 Table 3 24. Relati ve abundance of taxa by preferred h abitat. Context Mature Forest Secondary Growth Riverine Wetland Agricultural Residential Area Midden 13.82% 43.09% 1.63% 1.63% 39.02% 0.81% Plaza II 15.00% 43.03% 0.61% 1.52% 39.85% 0.00% Entire Site 15.68% 42 .76% 1.06% 1.39% 38.75% 0.35%

PAGE 70

70 CHAPTER 4 INTERPRETATION Evaluating the Strengths of the Multiple D atasets In all contexts, faunal materials were better preserved and more specifically identifiable than either of the two botanical datasets. 32% of faunal r emains were identifiable to the level of family or better, as compared with 15% of phytoliths or 3% of macrobotanical remains. While levels of identification are not directly comparable between plants and animals, it does provide a sense for the differenti al preservation and reliability of identifications across datasets. Like all archaeological materials, there are some contexts that are better suited to preservation and recovery of materials than others. Plaza II excavations did not yield nearly as many f aunal materials as did the midden samples. The faunal specimens that were recovered from the Plaza II excavations were less eroded or fragmented than those recovered from midden samples, however, indicating that the smaller quantity of specimens recovered is not likely due to preservation issues. It is possible that it is an effect of the marketplace being swept clean on a regular basis (Hayden and Cannon 1983) Phytoliths, which are small enough that they would not have been swept up in plaza cleanings, were recovered in greatest abun dance in the Plaza II samples. Like faunal materials, these phytoliths were somewhat less eroded than the phytoliths recovered from household midden samples. However, the extremely low abundance of phytoliths recovered from household middens would indicate that the depositional context of middens causes taphonomic processes, such as chemical etching or increased erosion, that are particularly destructive to phytoliths. Additionally, the presence of Musa sp. in one of the Plaza II samples is indicative of th e incorporation of post contact period botanical

PAGE 71

71 materials in the archaeological soils. Since there is not a way to directly date the phytoliths from other Plaza II samples, caution should be exercised in interpreting these materials, as contamination may have been more widespread across the plaza. The fidelity tests would indicate that the environment in and around Motul de San Jose at the time of occupation was primarily secondary growth, but that the residents both had access to mature forested areas a nd a large quantity of agricultural fields. This pattern is consistent with what would be expected when residents of the site are practicing swidden agriculture with large areas of fields in various states of fallow around the site. The fidelity test shows little evidence for riverine or wetland resources being utilized, however, this is a result of a bias in the fidelity test, as it does not include freshwater mollusks, which are the primary local freshwater resource found in the faunal assemblage. The phy toliths from Motul de San Jose indicate an environment around the site that has been at least partially cleared of trees and underbrush. Poaceae and Asteraceae, the two most ubiquitous and numerous taxa, include many common disturbance species, though they also include the economically important Zea mays and Helianthus annuus (sunflower). Heliconia sp is now mostly grown as an ornamental plant, though the leaves can be used for food storage and cooking (Anderson 1998 ) The presence of domesticated plants is promising, though due to the above mentioned concerns with the security of the Plaza II contexts, it is unclear whether those phytoliths are from ancient agriculture. Though recovery and preservation were low for both phytoliths and macrobotanical remains, the two datasets do work well in conjunction with one another. Because they tend to favor different taxa, using both datasets together nearly doubled

PAGE 72

72 the number of identified taxa in the botanical samples. The o nly overlapping species was maize, an important domesticate and potentially ritually significant plant, which was found in low quantities in both macrobotanical and phytolith samples. Evaluating the Marketplace H ypothesis The distributional approach to testing market economies espoused by Hirth proposes that market economies allow households to access a wide variety of products, and that therefore the artifact assemblages from a site where the residents participated in a market economy would have a relat ively homogenous artifact assemblage, tempered by differences in wealth of the households (Stark and Garraty 2010) Within the faunal assemblage from each group, there is a high degree of diversity, but across the site, the degree of diversity is mostly consistent. If the residents of Motul de San Jose were participating in market economics, it would make sense that all households had access to approximately the same re sources, and therefore the assemblages between groups reflect roughly the same degree of diversity. Testing between households was not possible with botanical materials due to very low recovery and identifiability of these material types. No clear patte rns of distribution, abundance, and diversity emerged when comparing the faunal and botanical materials. The most diverse and abundant faunal samples came from household middens, whereas the most diverse and abundant phytolith and macrobotanical samples we re those collected in plaza II samples. It is possible that this is a result of taphonomic processes differentially affecting the materials. Faunal materials were better preserved in the household middens, while both types of botanical materials were bette r preserved in Plaza II samples. This could be one contributing factor in the difference in distribution, abundance and diversity between

PAGE 73

73 the datasets. It is also possible that this effect was produced by intrusion. Both botanical sets showed intrusive tax a in the Plaza II samples, but not in household midden samples. The faunal materials did not contain any taxa that were definitively intrusive in either the household middens or the Plaza II samples. Economically significant taxa of macrobotanicals and fau nal materials were found to be most abundant in the midden samples, but economically significant phytolith taxa were most abundant in the plaza samples. Likewise for exotic and ritually significant taxa, which were most abundant in the phy tolith record in the plaza area, macrobotanical and faunal materials were most abundant in the household middens. The spatial distribution of the phytoliths did not follow the phosphate patterns in the Plaza II area (Figure 4 2). Some of the areas with the highest P valu es had very low phytolith counts, and where the phytolith counts were high, P values were either low or moderate. This would suggest that the P values are high due to the deposition of organic materials other than plants, such as animal wastes. The distrib ution of phytoliths in the Plaza II area also does not align with patterns of distribution of Zn, Fe, or Cu. The highest density of phytoliths was located just north of the Acropolis structure, possibly in association with one of the middens found in the s outheast corner of the Plaza II area. where market exchange was the dominant mode of economic exchange will have an increase in homogeneity of material culture between the households. The greatest range of diversity and variability was found amongst the household midden faunal samples. As Garraty (2010) demonstrates, it is not clear what level of homogeneity ution is to compare

PAGE 74

74 intra site variability and homogeneity on a regional scale. This type of analysis may be possible with the faunal materials, but there has not been enough archaeobotanical research done in the Maya lowlands to allow for regional compari sons of macrobotanical or phytolith materials. Based on the conflicting results of the faunal and botanical materials, it is not clear whether the residents of Motul de San Jose were actively engaged in a market exchange economic system. A more durable da taset, such as ceramics, could be used to test assemblage homogeneity across the site, and would likely be less fraught with the uncertainties present in the botanical assemblages.

PAGE 75

75 Figure 4 1 Phytolith Density in the Plaza II area, as compared with P values.

PAGE 76

76 CHAPTER 5 CONCLUDING REMARKS This study aimed to evaluate the utility of combining multiple environmental datasets to better understand the economic exchange system of the Classic Maya site of Motul de San Jose. Three dis tinct datasets (macrobotanicals, phytoliths, and faunal materials) were analyzed, and the study focused specifically on household middens and the plaza II excavations. Analyzing the three datasets side by side provided for a clear picture of the environmen t that had been present at the site. The phytoliths and macrobotanical remains were more affected by taphonomic processes than the faunal materials, but the use of the two in conjunction provided more information than either would have individually. The ev aluation of the proposed marketplace in the plaza II area of the site was inconclusive using these materials. Future research into market exchange economics at the site may want to consider using faunal data or other more durable artifacts, such as ceramic s, in order to avoid the uncertainty caused by poor preservation and intrusive taxa. Both macrobotanical remains and phytoliths provide useful supplemental data to consider alongside other archaeological analyses, but in this case neither dataset is strong enough to provide conclusive evidence for market exchange.

PAGE 77

77 APPENDIX A PHYTOLITH PROCESSING PROCEDURES Soil samples were processed in batches of eight at the MU laboratory. For easy reference in the lab, the samples are placed in tubes labeled with pro venience information, as well as the numbers 1 8. The first set of samples I processed contained two samples from plaster floors (#1: 2A 5 6 1, #2: 2A 9 3 1), two samples from the east transect (#3: E2000, #4: E1600), and four samples from the plaza (#5: 6 0N, 100E, #6: 100N, 60E, #7: 40N, 40E, and #8: 60N, 0E). Samples were first crushed with a mortar and pestle to break up clumps of soil. The soil was then poured through a 16 mesh sieve to remove pebbles or macrobotanical remains. A few samples contain ed small, fragile snail shells. Of the soil that passed through the sieve, 10g was weighed out and added to a 50ml beaker. This is the portion of the sample that will be processed. The remainder of the sample was returned to the field bag and resealed. On ce in the 50ml beakers, 10ml of dH 2 O is added to each of the 8 samples. The samples are then stirred and then allowed to rest for 5 minutes. The pH of the samples is then measured with an electronic pH tester. A pH approaching 8 usually results in poor pre servation and recovery of phytoliths. In the first set of samples #3 and #7 absorbed all of the liquid and required a second addition of dH 2 O. The pH results were as follows: 2A 5 6 1 pH: 8.2 2A 9 3 1 pH: 8.0 E2000 pH: 6.0 E1600 pH: 7.4

PAGE 78

7 8 60N, 100E pH : 7.5 100N, 60E pH: 7.4 40N, 40E pH: 7.1 60N, 0E pH: 7.8 After pH testing, the samples are rinsed with dH 2 O into 50ml centrifuge tubes, and then centrifuged at 2000 rpm for 2 minutes. The next step in the procedures is to add 10ml of dilute HCl (86ml HCl with enough dH 2 O to equal 1l) to the samples and place them in a hot water bath to watch for a reaction. Most sediments have a minimal reaction to the dilute HCl. The first set of samples had violent reactions. Less than 10ml were added and samples we re not placed in the hot water. Violent reaction to dilute HCl was caused by a high concentration of carbonate material in the samples, which is not surprising given the samples come from an area that has calcium carbonate (limestone) bedrock. Samples E200 0 and 40N, 40E had less strong reactions than others, not surprising given their lower pH values. Dilute HCl was added to the samples a little at a time until the tubes were filled to the 40ml line. They were then topped with dH 2 O and placed in the centr ifuge at 2000rpm for 2 minutes. This process was repeated. The reaction was less dramatic the second time. The samples were then treated with the strong acid solution (50% nitric acid, 50% hydrochloric acid). The strong acid solution caused violent reactio ns in all samples, despite being added only one drop at a time. Samples were centrifuged with dH 2 O, and dilute HCl step was repeated for a third time. The third time through the dilute HCl step, the samples sat in a warm water bath for 30 minutes. After ce ntrifuging, the samples were again treated with the strong acid, while remaining in the warm water

PAGE 79

79 bath. Reaction was allowed to run for just over one hour. The samples were then rinsed with dH 2 O and centrifuged three times. The next step in processing so il samples is to remove organic materials. The standard MU procedures use a two step process for removing organic materials. This two step process begins with the addition of 10ml of household bleach to samples while they sit in a warm water bath. Bleach i s in contact with the soil samples for a maximum of five minutes. After ten minutes or more of contact time, the bleach will begin to etch the phytoliths. The first batch of samples reacted very strongly with the bleach, especially samples E2000 and 40N, 40E, and thus were not placed in the warm water bath. The particularly violent reaction of samples E2000 and 40N, 40E may indicate a correlation between low pH values and a larger proportion of organic material in the sample. After five minutes, the sampl es are topped with dH 2 O, and then rinsed three times with the centrifuge. The samples are then returned to the warm water bath. Standard procedures call for adding 40ml of H 2 O 2 but due to the strong reactions, it had to be added it in very small increment s. Samples had to be watched constantly to avoid bubbling over. This is indicative of highly organic samples. Samples 2A 5 6 1, 2A 9 3 1, E1600, and 60N, 0E were in contact with H 2 O 2 for three hours total, the others were in contact for 5.5 hours total. A fter each hour, the samples were topped with dH 2 O, centrifuged, the liquid was decanted and fresh H 2 O 2 was added. When samples stopped reacting, they were rinsed and centrifuged three times, then filled with a 1% Na 2 EDTA solution up to the 35ml line, and p laced in the reciprocal shaker for a minimum of 24 hours.

PAGE 80

80 After removal from the reciprocal shaker, the samples are sieved through a 60 mesh sieve to remove large grains of sand. The sample is washed into a 250ml centrifuge bottle with dH 2 O. The samples a re centrifuged for 2.5 minutes at 2000rpm. Using a 1% Alconox solution, the samples are rinsed back into 50ml centrifuge tubes. The tubes are topped with warm Alconox solution, and then centrifuged for 2.5 minutes at 2000rpm. The Alconox solution removes c lays from the samples, and this process is typically repeated until the samples run clear. Samples 2A 5 6 1, 2A 9 3 1, E1600, and 60N were rinsed three times with warm Alconox solution. Sample E2000 was rinsed eight times. Samples 60N, 100E, and 60N, 0E w ere rinsed eleven times with warm Alconox solution, and sample 100N, 60E was rinsed fifteen times. After the Alconox rinses ran clear, the samples were rinsed and centrifuged three times with dH 2 O. LMT is mixed with dH 2 O to achieve a specific gravity of 2.3. 10ml of LMT is added to each sample, and the sample is stirred well. The samples are then spun for five minutes at 3000rpm. The liquid is decanted into new 50ml centrifuge tubes; these are now the phytolith tubes. An additional 10ml of LMT is added t o the sample tubes, and the samples are again centrifuged for five minutes at 3000rpm. The liquid is again decanted into the phytolith tubes. Phytolith tubes are topped with warm dH 2 O, and then centrifuged for 10 minutes at 3000rpm. All but 5ml of the liqu id is carefully decanted for LMT recycling. The tubes are again topped with warm dH 2 O, and centrifuged for 10 minutes at 3000rpm. The decanted liquid is discarded, and the process is repeated once more. Phytolith tubes are then placed in a low temperature oven without lids so that the remaining 5ml of liquid can be evaporated.

PAGE 81

81 The remainder tubes are topped with warm dH 2 O and centrifuged for 2.5 minutes at 2500 rpm. The first rinse is decanted for recycling. The process is repeated twice, with the second a nd third rinses discarded. Remainders are also placed in the low temperature oven so that the excess liquid can be evaporated. The first set of samples did not separate cleanly with the LMT. Pearsall and Duncan believe this is due to insufficient removal of clays. With the most recent revision of the procedures, clays are typically removed by rinsing with Alconox, as this is often sufficient. Because samples 100N, 60E and 40N, 40E did not cleanly separate with the LMT, the phytolith tubes were rinsed b ack into the remainder tubes with Na 2 EDTA and were placed back in the reciprocal shaker for approximately 24 hours. At the end of 24 hours, they were rinsed and centrifuged three times. The samples were then processed according to sedimentation procedure 5 B in the 2005 MU lab procedures: samples are rinsed into 200ml Fleakers with dH 2 O and filled up to 11cm. The sample is thoroughly stirred. According to the principle of sedimentation, soil particles will settle out of liquid at different rates according to the specific gravity of the particles, the specific gravity of the liquid, radius of the particles and the temperature of the liquid. The Missouri Paleoethnobotany lab has calculated that a sedimentation time of 9.3 hours at room temperature best separate s clays from silt particles and phytoliths in soil samples. This process is repeated until the supernatant liquid is clear. Samples 100N, 60E and 40N, 40E required three periods of sedimentation. After additional clay removal, the samples were rinsed bac k into 50ml centrifuge tubes and centrifuged to reduce liquid. 10ml of LMT at a specific gravity of 2.3 was

PAGE 82

82 added to each tube, and the process repeated from that point according to the procedures. The second set of samples were all from plaza II. 70N, 90E pH: 7.2 50N, 80E pH: 6.7 10N, 70E pH: 7.4 80N, 40E pH: 7.8 0N, 30E pH: 7.8 70N, 30E pH: 7.8 10N, 20E pH: 7.8 30N, 10E pH: 7.8 The second set of samples reacted strongly to the dilute HCl, just as the first set of samples did. Dilute HCl was ad ded 10ml at a time, up to the 40ml line, while the samples rested in a warm water bath. At the end of one hour, the samples were topped with dH 2 O and centrifuged and the liquid decanted. The samples then went back into the warm water bath and the process w as repeated. Samples spent a total of 3 hours in contact with dilute HCl. They were then rinsed and centrifuged three times with dH 2 O. The samples were rinsed into 250ml centrifuge tubes with dH 2 O. 40ml of strong acid solution was added, and the samples were placed in a warm water bath for one hour. By processing in larger tubes, the samples could be in contact with the full amount of strong acid called for in the procedures, without the risk of bubbling over. This allowed for more complete reactions, whi ch should result in a cleaner end product. At the end of one hour, the samples were topped with dH 2 O, centrifuged, the liquid was

PAGE 83

83 decanted, and then the strong acid reaction was repeated. At the end of the second hour there was no sign of reaction taking p lace. Samples were then rinsed and centrifuged three times with dH 2 O. After rinsing the strong acid from the samples, the samples began the organic removal process. The samples reacted strongly to the bleach process, just like the first set of samples. Th e bleach was rinsed out with the use of the centrifuge, and H 2 O 2 was added. Because the samples were in 250ml tubes, 50ml of H 2 O 2 was added to each sample. Samples were placed in the warm water bath. At the end of one hour, the samples were still reacting. Samples were diluted with warm H 2 O and rinsed three times with the centrifuge. Because there was concern about clay removal from two of the plaza samples from the first set, I added 30ml of 1% Na 2 EDTA solution to the tubes and placed the tubes in the re ciprocal shaker overnight. Even though the samples still required more organic removal, the additional shaking with the dispersal agent should facilitate the later removal of clays from the sediments. Additional contact time with the Na 2 EDTA solution is no t known to harm phytoliths in any way. The samples were rinsed and centrifuged at 2000rpm with dH 2 O three times to remove Na 2 EDTA. The samples were again placed in the warm water bath with 40mL H 2 O 2 The reaction was minimal. After one hour, the samples were removed, rinsed and centrifuged at 2000rpm with dH 2 O three times to remove the H 2 O 2 At this point, instead of following the standard procedures, the samples were been resistant to H 2 O 2

PAGE 84

84 20mL of Nitric Acid is added to each of the samples, and the samples are placed i n a Solution. The solution darkens when added to organic material. As the reaction runs, the solution changes to a bright lime green color, indicating a breakdown of the organic matter. After 20 minutes, a small scoop (<1g) of KCl is added to each sample to allow the reaction to continue. If the sample does not change color when the KCl is added, n process took approximately an hour and forty minutes. centrifuged at 2000rpm with dH 2 O three times to remove the solution. The samples were then returned to the warm water bath. 10g KOH was dissolved in 100mL dH 2 O and 10mL of this solution was added to each of the samples. The samples sat in the warm water bath with the KOH solution for 5 minutes, and are then rinsed and centrifuged at 2000rpm with warm dH 2 O three times to r emove the solution. The KOH removes humic colloids from the soil. After rinsing the samples to remove KOH, they were topped to 30mL total volume with 1% Na 2 EDTA solution and placed in the reciprocal shaker for a minimum of 24 hours. The samples were then rinsed and sieved with 1% Alconox solution according to procedure. It seems that the additional time in the reciprocal shaker did not expedite the clay removal at all. Sample 70N, 30E was stopped at 5 rinses, 10N, 20E at 6 rinses, 0N, 30E at 7 rinses, 8 0N, 40E and 30N, 10E at 8 rinses, 50N, 80E at 10 rinses, 10N, 70E at 11 rinses and 70N, 90E at 16 rinses. After the Alconox rinses all samples were

PAGE 85

85 rinsed and centrifuged at 2000rpm with warm dH 2 O three times to remove residual Alconox. The samples we re then floated with LMT according to procedure, and placed in oven to dry. The second set of samples was somewhat cleaner than the first, though still far from ideal. The third set of samples that were processed came from both the east transect and midd ens. 1350E pH: 7.4 1450E pH: 7.6 1750E pH: 7.4 1850E pH: 6.4 31A 4 3 1 pH: 7.8 31A 7 2 2 pH: 7.9 12B 18 3 3 pH: 7.8 12B 25 1 3 pH: 8.1 Most of the third set of samples had a very strong reaction to the carbonate removal process, indicating a large quantity of carbonate material in the soil The third set of samples were processed in the same manner as the second set, with an exception being the organic removal. The third set of samples had one hour of contact time with H 2 O 2 Solution process and the KOH. After the KOH, the samples received an additional 2.5 hours of contact with H 2 O 2 According to Pearsall, alternating between H 2 O 2 removal. Indeed, the organic remov al process for the third set of samples resulted in a dramatic color change from dark blackish brown to powdery grey. While this complete

PAGE 86

86 organic removal is desirable, the samples had already lost so much volume during the intense carbonate removal that af ter the organics were removed as well, there appeared to be hardly anything left in the sample tubes. These samples only required three Alconox rinses before they were rinsed and centrifuged at 2000rpm with dH 2 O three times, and then floated with LMT acc ording to procedure. The samples appear clean, but they also seem virtually non existent. The near invisibility of these samples required that they be wet mounted instead of dry mounted onto slides. Once processing is complete, samples are placed in a l ow tem perature oven (approximately 90 degrees F ahrenheit ) until they are dry. Using a clean spatula, a small amount of the silty grey residue is placed on a clean slide. A small amount of Canada balsam is then mixed with the sediment and spread across the slide. The slide is then closed with a clean cover slip and left to harden on a warming plate with a small weight on top to level the slide. The Missouri University Paleoethnobotany Laboratory has developed a wet mounting procedure for samples that are too small to scoop with a spatula. In wet mounting, enough water is added to the phytolith tube to suspend the extract. This solution is allowed to settle for a few hours, and then the extract from the bottom is removed using a pipette. Several drops are plac ed on a clean slide, and allowed to dry. The pipetting process is repeated until the phytoliths appear to be removed from the tube. A small amount of Canada balsam is then added to the slide, mixed around to incorporate the phytolith extract, and then seal ed with a cover slip and allowed to set as normal. Samples 70 N, 30E; 10N, 1 20E; 1350E; 1450E; 1750E;

PAGE 87

87 1850E; 31A 4 3 1; 31A 7 2 2; 12B 18 3 3; and 12B 25 1 1 were mounted using the wet mounting procedure.

PAGE 88

88 APPENDIX B DETAILED PROVENIENCE AND TAXONOMIC INFORMATION Table B 1. Macrobotanicals Provenience Context NISP Taxonomic Plant Name Description of Plant Part 12B 18 3 3 Fill 3 Dicot Wood Carbon 12B 18 3 3 Fill 5 Pinus sp. Carbon 12B 18 3 3 Fill 4 Spermatophyte Carbon 12B 25 1 2 Fill 1 Dicot Wood C arbon 12B 25 1 2 Fill 4 Spermatophyte Carbon 2A 12 3 1 Floor 2 Chenopod Uncarbonized Seed 2A 12 3 1 Floor 6 Dicot Wood Carbon 2A 12 3 1 Floor 4 Pinus sp. Carbon 2A 12 3 4 Floor 1 Hardwood Carbon 2A 21 3 1 Floor 0 No Carbon 2A 8 3 1 Floor 7 Hardwood Carbon 2A 8 3 1 Floor 2 Pinus sp. Carbon 2A 8 3 1 Floor 0 No Carbon 2A 5 5 1 Midden 3 Dicot Wood Carbon 2A 5 5 1 Midden 1 Hardwood Carbon 2A 5 5 3 Midden 9 Dicot Wood Carbon 2A 5 5 3 Midden 3 Hardwood Carbon 2A 5 6 1 Midden 0 No Carbon 2A 5 6 2 Midden 5 Dicot Wood Resinous Material 2A 5 6 2 Midden 25 Hardwood Carbon 2A 5 6 2 Midden 7 Spermatophyte Carbon 2A 5 6 2 Midden 0 No Carbon 2A 9 3 1 Midden 9 Hardwood Carbon 31A 5 4 1 Midden 1 Aracaceae Carbon 31A 5 4 1 Midden 4 Dicot Wood Carbon 1 2B 12 0 0 Other 1 Aracaceae Carbon 12B 12 0 0 Other 3 Chenopod Uncarbonized Seed 12B 12 0 0 Other 9 Dicot Wood Carbon 12B 12 0 0 Other 4 Hardwood Carbon 12B 12 0 0 Other 2 Pinus sp. Carbon 12B 12 0 0 Other 6 Spermatophyte Carbon 12B 24 0 0 Other 1 Ch enopod Uncarbonized Seed 12B 24 0 0 Other 1 Chenopod Uncarbonized Seed 12B 24 0 0 Other 14 Dicot Wood Carbon 12B 24 0 0 Other 10 Dicot Wood Carbonized Bark 12B 24 0 0 Other 5 Dicot Wood Carbon 12B 24 0 0 Other 6 Hardwood Carbon 12B 24 0 0 Other 4 Har dwood Carbon 12B 24 0 0 Other 33 Spermatophyte Carbon 12B 24 0 0 Other 10 Spermatophyte Carbon 12B 24 0 0 Other 30 Spermatophyte Resinous Material 12B 25 1 1 Other 6 Hardwood Carbon 12B 25 1 1 Other 2 Spermatophyte Carbon 12B 3 0 0 Other 6 Dicot Wood Carbon

PAGE 89

89 Table B 1 Continued Provenience Context NISP Taxonomic Plant Name Description of Plant Part 12C 14 0 0 Other 20 Dicot Wood Carbon 12C 14 0 0 Other 1 Fabaceae Uncarbonized Seed 12C 14 0 0 Other 9 Hardwood Carbon 12C 14 0 0 Other 5 Pinus sp. C arbon 12C 14 0 0 Other 1 Zea m ays Carbonized Cob 12C 14 0 0 Other 3 Uncarbonized Seed 12C 8 0 0 Other 2 Dicot Wood Carbon 12C 8 0 0 Other 8 Dicot Wood Carbon 12C 8 0 0 Other 2 Hardwood Carbon 12C 8 0 0 Other 1 Spermatophyte Carbon 12D 1 2 2 Other 4 Dicot Wood Carbon 12D 1 2 2 Other 4 Spermatophyte Carbon 12D 2 0 0 Other 5 Dicot Wood Carbon 12D 2 0 0 Other 5 Hardwood Carbon 12D 2 0 0 Other 2 Pinus sp. Carbon 12D 2 0 0 Other 2 Spermatophyte Carbon 12D 6 0 0 Other 3 Aracaceae Carbon 12D 6 0 0 Ot her 1 Chenopod Uncarbonized Seed 12D 6 0 0 Other 2 Chenopod Uncarbonized Seed 12D 6 0 0 Other 8 Dicot Wood Carbon 12D 6 0 0 Other 2 Hardwood Carbon 12D 6 0 0 Other 4 Pinus sp. Carbon 12D 6 0 0 Other 17 Spermatophyte Carbon 12D 6 0 0 Other 1 Spermatop hyte Carbon 12D 6 0 0 Other 1 Uncarbonized Seed 21A 12 3 3 Other 2 Chenopod Uncarbonized Seed Pod 21A 12 3 3 Other 5 Dicot Wood Carbon 21A 12 3 3 Other 3 Spermatophyte Carbon 24B 2 0 0 Other 4 Chenopod Uncarbonized Seed 24B 2 0 0 Other 4 Dicot Wood Carbon 24B 2 0 0 Other 1 Hardwood Carbon 24B 2 0 0 Other 9 Spermatophyte Carbon 29A 1 0 0 Other 4 Spermatophyte Carbon 2A 12 3 4 Other 4 Dicot Wood Carbon 2A 40 1 0 Other 0 No Carbon 2A 40 5 3 Other 1 Dicot Wood Carbon 2A 41 3 2 Other 1 Hardwood Ca rbon 2A 5 6 3 Other 1 Zea m ays Carbonized Cob 31A 3 3 1 Other 7 Dicot Wood Carbon 31A 3 3 1 Other 2 Dicot Wood Carbonized Bark 31A 3 3 1 Other 24 Hardwood Carbon 31A 3 3 1 Other 6 Spermatophyte Carbon 31A 3 3 1 Other 1 Uncarbonized Seed Pod 31A 3 4 2 Other 9 Dicot Wood Carbon 31A 3 4 2 Other 5 Hardwood Carbon 31A 3 4 2 Other 1 Pinus sp. Carbon 31A 3 4 2 Other 12 Spermatophyte Carbon

PAGE 90

90 Table B 1 Continued Provenience Context NISP Taxonomic Plant Name Description of Plant Part 31A 3 4 2 Other 2 Z ea m ays Carbonized Cob 31A 3 4 2 Other 1 Uncarbonized Seed Pod 31A 4 3 1 Other 2 Chenopod Uncarbonized Seed 31A 4 3 1 Other 60 Dicot Wood Carbon 31A 4 3 1 Other 1 Grapeseed Seed 31A 4 3 1 Other 3 Hardwood Carbon 31A 4 3 1 Other 2 Pinus sp. Carbon 3 1A 4 3 1 Other 9 Spermatophyte Carbon 31A 4 3 1 Other 1 Uncarbonized Seed 31A 7 2 2 Other 2 Aracaceae Carbon 31A 7 2 2 Other 20 Dicot Wood Carbon 31A 7 2 2 Other 1 Dicot Wood Carbonized Bark 31A 7 2 2 Other 3 Hardwood Carbon 31A 7 2 2 Other 5 Sperma tophyte Carbon 31A 7 2 2 Other 1 Uncarbonized Seed Pod 33D 12 1 0 Other 2 Aracaceae Carbon 33D 12 1 0 Other 12 Dicot Wood Carbon 33D 12 1 0 Other 9 Spermatophyte Carbon 44E 17 2 1 Other 1 Chenopod Uncarbonized Seed 46A 7 2 1 Other 0 No Carbon 46I 1 2 2 Other 1 Chenopod Uncarbonized Seed 46I 1 2 2 Other 1 Uncarbonized Seed 29A 1 0 0 Plaza II 1 Chenopod Uncarbonized Seed 29A 1 0 0 Plaza II 6 Hardwood Carbon 29A 13 0 0 Plaza II 1 Aracaceae Carbon 29A 13 0 0 Plaza II 3 Dicot Wood Carbon 29A 13 0 0 Plaza II 7 Hardwood Carbon 29A 13 0 0 Plaza II 10 Spermatophyte Carbon 29A 20 1 1 Plaza II 0 No Carbon 29A 6 0 0 Plaza II 4 Dicot Wood Carbon 29A 6 0 0 Plaza II 4 Hardwood Carbon 29A 6 0 0 Plaza II 5 Spermatophyte Carbon 29A 7 2 2 Plaza II 11 Dic ot Wood Carbon 29A 7 2 2 Plaza II 1 Hardwood Carbon 29A 7 2 2 Plaza II 12 Spermatophyte Carbon 29B 1 3 6 Plaza II 1 Chenopod Uncarbonized Seed Pod 29B 1 3 6 Plaza II 26 Dicot Wood Carbon 29B 1 3 6 Plaza II 17 Hardwood Carbon 29B 1 3 6 Plaza II 2 Pinu s sp. Carbon 29B 1 3 6 Plaza II 8 Spermatophyte Carbon 29B 1 3 6 Plaza II 1 Uncarbonized Seed 29C 12 0 0 Plaza II 2 Carbon 29F 10 2 2 Plaza II 6 Dicot Wood Carbon 29F 5 2 6 Plaza II 1 Aracaceae Carbon 29F 5 2 6 Plaza II 9 Dicot Wood Carbon 29F 5 2 6 Plaza II 1 Fabaceae Uncarbonized Seed 29F 5 2 6 Plaza II 3 Hardwood Carbon

PAGE 91

91 Table B 1 Continued Provenience Context NISP Taxonomic Plant Name Description of Plant Part 29F 5 2 6 Plaza II 5 Spermatophyte Carbon 29F 5 2 6 Plaza II 2 Spermatophyte Re sinous Material 29F 5 2 6 Plaza II 1 Uncarbonized Seed 29F 8 2 2 Plaza II 8 Dicot Wood Carbon 29F 8 2 2 Plaza II 10 Spermatophyte Carbon 29G 10 2 4 Plaza II 1 Dicot Wood Carbon 29G 10 2 4 Plaza II 6 Hardwood Carbon 29G 10 2 4 Plaza II 4 Spermatophyt e Carbon 29G 5 2 4 Plaza II 3 Dicot Wood Carbon 29G 5 2 4 Plaza II 1 Dicot Wood Carbonized Root 29G 5 2 4 Plaza II 12 Spermatophyte Carbon 2A 21 3 1 Plaza II 2 Spermatophyte Carbon 814

PAGE 92

92 Table B 2. Microbotanicals Provenience Context NISP Taxon omic Plant Name E1350 East Transect 1 Asteraceae E1350 East Transect 24 Eroded E1350 East Transect 3 Poaceae E1350 East Transect 14 Unidentifiable E1450 East Transect 34 Eroded E1450 East Transect 16 Poaceae E1450 East Transect 15 Unidentifiabl e E1600 East Transect 1 Asteraceae E1600 East Transect 33 Eroded E1600 East Transect 21 Poaceae E1600 East Transect 21 Unidentifiable E1600 East Transect 1 Zea mays E1750 East Transect 27 Eroded E1750 East Transect 2 Heliconia sp. E1750 E ast Transect 2 Poaceae E1750 East Transect 12 Unidentifiable E1850 East Transect 4 Asteraceae E1850 East Transect 29 Eroded E1850 East Transect 1 Heliconia sp E1850 East Transect 10 Poaceae E1850 East Transect 20 Unidentifiable E2000 East Transect 11 Diatom E2000 East Transect 53 Eroded E2000 East Transect 1 Musa sp (leaf) E2000 East Transect 17 Poaceae E2000 East Transect 91 Unidentifiable 0N, 30E Plaza II 2 Asteraceae 0N, 30E Plaza II 7 Diatom 0N, 30E Plaza II 123 Eroded 0N, 30E Plaza II 8 Heliconia sp. 0N, 30E Plaza II 16 Poaceae 0N, 30E Plaza II 101 Unidentifiable 0N, 30E Plaza II 2 Zea mays 100N, 60E Plaza II 6 Asteraceae 100N, 60E Plaza II 22 Eroded 100N, 60E Plaza II 17 Poaceae 100N, 60E Plaza II 17 Unidentifiable 10N, 20E Plaza II 3 Asteraceae 10N, 20E Plaza II 12 Eroded

PAGE 93

93 Table B 2 Continued Provenience Context NISP Taxonomic Plant Name 10N, 20E Plaza II 10 Poaceae 10N, 20E Plaza II 33 Unidentifiable 10N, 70E Plaza II 1 Aste raceae 10N, 70E Plaza II 25 Eroded 10N, 70E Plaza II 5 Poaceae 10N, 70E Plaza II 33 Unidentifiable 10N, 70E Plaza II 3 Zea mays 30N, 10E Plaza II 7 Asteraceae 30N, 10E Plaza II 28 Eroded 30N, 10E Plaza II 5 Poaceae 30N, 10E Plaza II 20 Unidentifiable 30N, 10E Plaza II 1 Zea mays 40N, 40E Plaza II 1 Annonaceae 40N, 40E Plaza II 1 Cucurbita pepo 40N, 40E Plaza II 30 Eroded 40N, 40E Plaza II 36 Unidentifiable 50N, 80E Plaza II 4 Asteraceae 50N, 80E Plaza II 7 Diatom 50N, 80E Plaza II 19 Eroded 50N, 80E Plaza II 24 Poaceae 50N, 80E Plaza II 42 Unidentifiable 50N, 80E Plaza II 2 Zea mays 60N, 100E Plaza II 1 Annonaceae 60N, 100E Plaza II 4 Asteraceae 60N, 100E Plaza II 12 Eroded 60N, 100E Plaza II 1 Heliconia sp. 60N, 100E Plaza II 7 Poaceae 60N, 100E Plaza II 116 Unidentifiable 60N, 100E Plaza II 1 Zea mays 60N, 0E Plaza II 7 Eroded 60N, 0E Plaza II 4 Poaceae 60N, 0E Plaza II 5 Unidentifiable 70N, 30E Plaza II 11 Asteraceae 70 N, 30E Plaza II 1 Diatom 70N, 30E Plaza II 36 Eroded 70N, 30E Plaza II 33 Poaceae 70N, 30E Plaza II 49 Unidentifiable 70N, 90E Plaza II 4 Asteraceae 70N, 90E Plaza II 1 Diatom

PAGE 94

94 Table B 2 Continued Provenience Context NISP Taxonomic Plant Name 70N, 90E Plaza II 16 Eroded 70N, 90E Plaza II 1 Heliconia sp. 70N, 90E Plaza II 6 Poaceae 70N, 90E Plaza II 105 Unidentifiable 80N, 40E Plaza II 2 Asteraceae 80N, 40E Plaza II 55 Eroded 80N, 40E Plaza II 2 Musa sp. (leaf) 80N, 40E Plaza II 16 Poaceae 80N, 40E Plaza II 59 Unidentifiable 12B 18 3 3 3 Asteraceae 12B 18 3 3 17 Eroded 12B 18 3 3 1 Poaceae 12B 18 3 3 3 Unidentifiable 12B 25 1 3 8 Asteraceae 12B 25 1 3 1 Diatom 12B 25 1 3 23 Eroded 12B 25 1 3 1 Poaceae 12B 25 1 3 4 Unidentifiable 2A 5 6 1 13 Eroded 2A 5 6 1 3 Poaceae 2A 5 6 1 4 Unidentifiable 2A 9 3 1 21 Eroded 2A 9 3 1 3 Unidentifiable 31A 4 3 1 14 Asteraceae 31A 4 3 1 3 diatom 31A 4 3 1 81 Eroded 31A 4 3 1 64 Unidentifiable 31A 7 2 2 10 Asteraceae 31A 7 2 2 63 Eroded 31A 7 2 2 1 Heliconia sp. 31A 7 2 2 67 Unidentifiable

PAGE 95

95 Table B 3. Faunal m aterials Provenience Context info NISP Identification Group A surface collection 1 Gastropoda MSJ group E2H, Str 7 looted tomb 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 10A 2 1 1 Humus with some rock fill 1 Mammalia MSJ 10A 2 1 1 Humus with some rock fill 1 Pachychilus indiorum MSJ 10A 2 1 1 Humus with some rock fill 1 Pachychilus indiorum MSJ 10A 2 1 1 Humus with s ome rock fill 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 10A 2 2 1 Top of terrace 1 Pachychilus indiorum MSJ 10A 2 29,30 1 Pachychilus indiorum MSJ 10A 2 4 1 Floor 1 Pachychilus indiorum MSJ 10A 2 5 1 Fill 1 Pachychilus indiorum MSJ 10A 3 10 1 6th floor? 1 Pomacea fla gellata MSJ 10A 3 7 28,29,30 grey soil below floor, limestone rock 1 Olividae MSJ 10A 3 7 28,29,30 grey soil below floor, limestone rock 1 Pachychilus indiorum MSJ 10A 3 7 28,29,30 grey soil below floor, limestone rock 1 Rodentia, small MSJ 10D 20 1 2( ? 3) 2 Mammalia, large/intermediate MSJ 10D 20 2 4 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 13A 1 3 1 some piedrine including big chunk in SE corner, eroded floor above? 1 Class unknown MSJ 13A 1 3 1 some piedrine including big chunk in SE corner, eroded floor above? 1 Mammalia, intermediate/large MSJ 13A 1 3 1 some piedrine including big chunk in SE corner, eroded floor above? 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 13A 1 3 1 some piedrine including big chunk in SE corner, eroded floor above? 5 Mammalia, large MSJ 13A 1 3 1 some piedr ine including big chunk in SE corner, eroded floor above? 5 Mammalia, large MSJ 13A 1 3 1 some piedrine including big chunk in SE corner, eroded floor above? 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 13A 4 3 1 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 13D 16 1 2 1 Odocoileus virginia nus MSJ 15 1 Aves MSJ 15 1 Aves MSJ 15 1 Aves MSJ 15 1 Canis familiaris MSJ 15 5 Dasypus novemcinctus MSJ 15 11 Dasypus novemcinctus MSJ 15 1 Gastropoda (aquatic) MSJ 15 1 Gastropoda (aquatic) MSJ 15 1 Mammalia MSJ 15 1 Mammalia MSJ 15 1 Mammalia MSJ 15 1 Mammalia MSJ 15 1 Mammalia MSJ 15 2 Mammalia MSJ 15 1 Mammalia

PAGE 96

96 Table B 3. Continued Provenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 15 1 Mammalia MSJ 15 2 Mammalia MSJ 15 2 Mammalia MSJ 15 1 Mammalia MSJ 15 1 M ammalia, intermediate MSJ 15 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15 1 Mammalia, small MSJ 15 1 Mammalia, small MSJ 15 1 Mollusca MSJ 15 1 Mollusca MSJ 15 1 Mollusca MSJ 15 1 Mollusca MSJ 15 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15 1 Osteichthyes MSJ 15 1 Pachychilus indiorum MSJ 15 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 15 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 15 1 Prunum apicinum MSJ 15 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 15 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 15 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 1 5 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 15 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 15 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 15 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 15 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 15 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 15 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 15 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 15 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 15 1 Psoronaias sp. M SJ 15 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 15 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 15 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 15 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 15 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 15 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 15 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 15 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 15 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 15 13 Psoronaias s p. MSJ 15 18 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 15 48 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 15 1 Rodentia MSJ 15 1 Rodentia MSJ 15 1 Rodentia MSJ 15 2 Rodentia MSJ 15 1 Rodentia MSJ 15 2 Rodentia MSJ 15 1 Rodentia MSJ 15 1 Rodentia MSJ 15 1 Rodentia

PAGE 97

97 Table B 3 Contin ued Provenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 15 1 Rodentia MSJ 15 1 Rodentia MSJ 15 1 Rodentia MSJ 15 1 Rodentia MSJ 15 1 Rodentia MSJ 15 1 Rodentia MSJ 15 1 Rodentia MSJ 15 1 Rodentia MSJ 15 1 Rodentia MSJ 15 1 Rodentia MSJ 15 1 Rodentia MSJ 15 1 Rodentia MSJ 15 2 Rodentia, small MSJ 15 1 Rodentia, small MSJ 15 1 Rodentia, small MSJ 15 1 Rodentia, small MSJ 15 1 Sigmodon sp. MSJ 15 5 Spondylus sp. MSJ 15 1 Squamata MSJ 15 1 Squamata MSJ 15 1 Squamata MSJ 15 1 Squamata MSJ 15 1 Squamata (maybe Corytophanidae) MSJ 15 1 Squamata (maybe Corytophanidae) MSJ 15 43 Strombidae MSJ 15 1 Strombidae MSJ 15 2 Vertebrata MSJ 15 24 Vertebrata MSJ 15 1 Vertebrata MSJ 15:Pyramid fill 1 Aves, small MSJ 1 5:Pyramid fill 3 Mammalia MSJ 15:Pyramid fill 1 Mammalia, small MSJ 15:Pyramid fill 3 Mammalia, small MSJ 15:Pyramid fill 1 Rajiformes MSJ 15:Pyramid fill 2 Rodentia MSJ 15:Pyramid fill 1 Rodentia MSJ 15:Pyramid fill 1 Rodentia MSJ 15:Pyramid fill 1 Rodentia MSJ 15:Pyramid fill 1 Rodentia MSJ 15:Pyramid fill 1 Rodentia

PAGE 98

98 Table B 3 Co n tinued Provenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 15:Pyramid fill 2 Serpentes MSJ 15:Pyramid fill 2 Testudines MSJ 15:Tomb 1 Bufo/Rana sp. MSJ 15:Tomb 1 Bufo/Rana sp. MSJ 15:Tomb 1 Carnivora MSJ 15:Tomb 1 Homo sapiens MSJ 15:Tomb 1 Iguanidae MSJ 15:Tomb 9 Mammalia MSJ 15:Tomb 35 Mammalia MSJ 15:Tomb 1 Mammalia MSJ 15:Tomb 3 Mammalia, large MSJ 15:Tomb 5 Mammalia, large MSJ 15:T omb 1 Mammalia, small MSJ 15:Tomb 1 Mammalia, small MSJ 15:Tomb 3 Mammalia, small MSJ 15:Tomb 1 Passeriniformes MSJ 15:Tomb 1 Passeriniformes MSJ 15:Tomb 1 Reptilia MSJ 15:Tomb 1 Reptilia/Amphibian MSJ 15:Tomb 1 Reptilia/Amphibian MSJ 15:To mb 1 Rodentia MSJ 15:Tomb 1 Rodentia MSJ 15:Tomb 1 Rodentia MSJ 15:Tomb 1 Rodentia MSJ 15:Tomb 1 Rodentia MSJ 15:Tomb 1 Rodentia MSJ 15:Tomb 1 Rodentia MSJ 15:Tomb 1 Rodentia MSJ 15:Tomb 1 Rodentia MSJ 15:Tomb 3 Serpentes MSJ 15:Tomb 1 Sigmodon hispidus MSJ 15:Tomb 1 Sigmodon hispidus MSJ 15:Tomb 1 Sigmodon hispidus MSJ 15:Tomb 1 Squamata MSJ 15:Tomb 1 Squamata MSJ 15:Tomb 1 Squamata MSJ 15:Tomb 2 Squamata MSJ 15:Tomb 1 Testudines MSJ 15:Tomb 22 Vertebrata MSJ 15:Tomb 5 Vertebrata MSJ 15:Tomb 1 Vertebrata MSJ 15:Tomb 5 Vertebrata MSJ 15A 1 2 1 humus, plaza fill visible in profile 30cm below surface 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 15A 1 2 1 humus, plaza fill visible in profile 30cm below surface 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 15A 10 3 2 Fill and wall fall, composed of loose soil around many rocks 2 Pachychilus indiorum MSJ 15A 10 3 2 Fill and wall fall, composed of loose soil around many rocks 7 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 15A 10 3 3 Fill and wall fall similar to two previous lots 3 M ammalia, large

PAGE 99

99 Table B 3 Continued Provenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 15A 10 3 3 Fill and wall fall similar to two previous lots 5 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 15A 10 3 4 Wall fall 2 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 10 3 4 Wall fall 1 Odocoileus virgi nianus MSJ 15A 11 1 2 Humus above wall fall or possible stair fall 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 11 2 1 Wall/stair/platform fall, possibly with the bottom of the lot being the original floor of the frontal platform 1 Mammalia MSJ 15A 11 2 1 Wall/stai r/platform fall, possibly with the bottom of the lot being the original floor of the frontal platform 1 Mammalia MSJ 15A 11 2 1 Wall/stair/platform fall, possibly with the bottom of the lot being the original floor of the frontal platform 1 Pachychilus in diorum MSJ 15A 11 2 1 Wall/stair/platform fall, possibly with the bottom of the lot being the original floor of the frontal platform 1 Pachychilus indiorum MSJ 15A 11 2 1 Wall/stair/platform fall, possibly with the bottom of the lot being the original fl oor of the frontal platform 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 15A 11 2 1 Wall/stair/platform fall, possibly with the bottom of the lot being the original floor of the frontal platform 10 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 15A 11 2 3 Fill and fall from platform terrace) 1 Mam malia MSJ 15A 11 2 3 Fill and fall from platform terrace) 1 Mammalia MSJ 15A 11 2 4 Fill from on top of Floor I 5 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 11 3 3 Arbitrary fill lot in front of Wall 12, looking for a floor 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 15A 11 3 4 Fill above a possible eroded floor 1 Agouti paca MSJ 15A 11 3 4 Fill above a possible eroded floor 1 Mammalia MSJ 15A 11 3 4 Fill above a possible eroded floor 2 Mammalia, large/intermediate MSJ 15A 11 3 4 Fill above a possible eroded floor 2 Mammalia, large/inter mediate MSJ 15A 11 3 4 Fill above a possible eroded floor 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 12 2 6 Fill or wall fall above layer of piedrin e 2 Mammalia MSJ 15A 12 2 6 Fill or wall fall above layer of piedrin e 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 12 2 6 Fill or wall fall above layer of piedrine 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 12 2 7 Missing lot form 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 14 3 2 Wall fall above floor/wall and next to wall 1 Tayassuidae

PAGE 100

100 Table B 3 Continued Provenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 15A 15 2 1 Wall fall along east west wall, above bench inside South Room 4 Mammalia, large/intermediate MSJ 15A 15 2 1 Wall fall along east west wall, above bench inside South Room 1 Mazama americana MSJ 15A 15 2 1 Wall fall along east west wall, ab ove bench inside South Room 1 Mazama americana MSJ 15A 17 2 1 Wall fall over two stucco floors, Floor B and Floor B' (slightly lower) 6 Mammalia MSJ 15A 17 2 1 Wall fall over two stucco floors, Floor B and Floor B' (slightly lower) 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 17 2 1 Wall fall over two stucco floors, Floor B and Floor B' (slightly lower) 4 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 17 2 1 Wall fall over two stucco floors, Floor B and Floor B' (slightly lower) 19 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 17 2 1 Wall fall over two stucco floor s, Floor B and Floor B' (slightly lower) 1 Mammalia, large/intermediate MSJ 15A 17 2 1 Wall fall over two stucco floors, Floor B and Floor B' (slightly lower) 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 18 2 1 Wall fall above floor 1 Dasyprocta punctata MSJ 15A 18 2 1 Wall fall above floor 1 Dasypus novemcinctus MSJ 15A 18 2 1 Wall fall above floor 1 Dasypus novemcinctus MSJ 15A 18 2 1 Wall fall above floor 1 Dasypus novemcinctus MSJ 15A 18 2 1 Wall fall above floor 1 Dasypus novemcinctus MSJ 15A 18 2 1 Wall fa ll above floor 1 Mammalia MSJ 15A 18 2 1 Wall fall above floor 3 Mammalia MSJ 15A 18 2 1 Wall fall above floor 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 18 2 1 Wall fall above floor 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 18 2 1 Wall fall above floor 1 Odocoileus virg inianus MSJ 15A 18 2 1 Wall fall above floor 1 Olivella perplexa MSJ 15A 18 2 1 Wall fall above floor 1 Pachychilus indiorum MSJ 15A 19 2 3 Wall fall in front of U shaped bench from the level of the bench top down to Floor B' 1 Tayassuidae MSJ 15A 20 2 1 Wall fall above floor and along south wall 1 Artiodactyla MSJ 15A 21 1 1 Humus over wall fall from wall on west side of unit 1 Dasypus novemcinctus MSJ 15A 21 1 1 Humus over wall fall from wall on west side of unit 1 Mammalia MSJ 15A 21 1 1 Humus ove r wall fall from wall on west side of unit 1 Tayassuidae

PAGE 101

101 Table B 3 Continued Provenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 15A 21 2 1 Wall fall from western edge of unit on top of Floor B; neither Floors B and C was found 10 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 15A 21 2 2 Fill in a very eroded section of wall 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 21 2 2 Fill in a very eroded section of wall 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 21 3 1 Fill b/ Floor C and over Floor D 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 21 3 1 Fill b/ Floor C and over Floor D 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 15A 22 2 1 Wall fall 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 22 2 1 Wall fall 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 22 2 1 Wall fall 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 15A 22 2 1 Wall fall 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 15A 22 2 1 Wall fall 1 Psor onaias sp MSJ 15A 22 2 2 Wall fall closer to the Floor D 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 22 2 2 Wall fall closer to the Floor D 5 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 22 2 2 Wall fall closer to the Floor D 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 22 2 2 Wall fall closer to the Floor D 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 22 2 2 Wall fall closer to the Floor D 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 23 2 1 Wall fall above what should be a wall (not found) 1 Mammalia MSJ 15A 23 2 2 Wall fall and soil right above floor 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 23 2 2 Wall fall and soil right above floor 3 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 23 2 3 1 Mammalia MSJ 15A 24 2 1 Wall fall along wall, above floor 2 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 15A 24 2 1 Wall fall along wall, above floor 1 Tayassuidae MSJ 15A 24 2 2 Wall fall above floor 5 Cervidae MSJ 15A 24 2 2 Wall fall above floor 9 Cervidae MSJ 15A 24 2 2 Wall fall above floor 1 Cervidae MSJ 15A 24 2 2 Wall fall above floor 2 Cervidae MSJ 15A 24 2 2 Wall fall above floor 30 Mammalia

PAGE 102

102 Table B 3 Continued Provenience Contex t info NISP Identification MSJ 15A 24 2 2 Wall fall above floor 1 Mammalia MSJ 15A 24 2 2 Wall fall above floor 2 Mazama americana MSJ 15A 24 2 2 Wall fall above floor 2 Mazama americana MSJ 15A 24 2 2 Wall fall above floor 1 Odocoileus virginianus MS J 15A 25 1 1 Humus over interior floor and wall fall 2 Mammalia MSJ 15A 26 1 1 Humus layer over wall full on platform in front of southern room of western palace of Group D 1 Class unknown MSJ 15A 26 2 1 Floor D with wall fall over it removed 1 Mammalia MSJ 15A 26 2 1 Floor D with wall fall over it removed 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 26 2 2 Platform and wall fall, following a possible terrace along north edge of unit 2 Mammalia MSJ 15A 26 2 2 Platform and wall fall, following a possible terrace along nor th edge of unit 3 Mammalia MSJ 15A 26 2 2 Platform and wall fall, following a possible terrace along north edge of unit 1 Mammalia MSJ 15A 26 2 2 Platform and wall fall, following a possible terrace along north edge of unit 1 Mollusca, marine MSJ 15A 26 2 2 Platform and wall fall, following a possible terrace along north edge of unit 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 15A 26 2 4 Fill above Floor E" and below Lot 2 3 1 Pachychilus indiorum MSJ 15A 26 3 5 Arbitrary fill lot below Floor D down to Floor E/E" of prev ious construction 1 Mammalia, large/intermediate MSJ 15A 26 3 5 Arbitrary fill lot below Floor D down to Floor E/E" of previous construction 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 15A 26 3 5 Arbitrary fill lot below Floor D down to Floor E/E" of previous construction 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 15A 26 3 6 Arbitrary fill lot below Floor D down to Floor E/E" 1 Mammalia, small MSJ 15A 26 3 6 Arbitrary fill lot below Floor D down to Floor E/E" 1 Testudines MSJ 15A 26 3 8 Fill below Floor E"/F down to level of Floor G/H 2 M ammalia, intermediate MSJ 15A 26 3 8 Fill below Floor E"/F down to level of Floor G/H 1 Pachychilus indiorum MSJ 15A 26 3 8 Fill below Floor E"/F down to level of Floor G/H 1 Rodentia MSJ 15A 27 2 1 Wall fall from terrace steps 1 Dermatemys mawii MSJ 15A 27 2 1 Wall fall from terrace steps 1 Psoronaias sp

PAGE 103

103 Table B 3 Continued Provenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 15A 27 2 2 Mixed fill and wall fall of possible destroyed step 1 Pachychilus indiorum MSJ 15A 27 3 2 Fill below level of pos sible terrace floor (about level of Floor E"/F) 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 27 3 2 Fill below level of possible terrace floor (about level of Floor E"/F) 2 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 27 3 2 Fill below level of possible terrace floor (about level of Floor E"/F ) 1 Pachychilus indiorum MSJ 15A 27 3 2 Fill below level of possible terrace floor (about level of Floor E"/F) 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 15A 27 3 3 Arbitrary fill lot below level of Floor E"/F down to top of stone in second row in Wall 13 3 Testudines MS J 15A 27 3 4 Fill below lot 3, from level of top of Stone B down to top of Stone C 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 27 3 4 Fill below lot 3, from level of top of Stone B down to top of Stone C 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 15A 27 3 4 Fill below lot 3, from le vel of top of Stone B down to top of Stone C 1 Testudines MSJ 15A 27 3 5 Fill under lots 2 and 3, and at same depth as lot 4 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 27 3 5 Fill under lots 2 and 3, and at same depth as lot 4 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 15A 27 3 6 More co mpact fill, ending at stucco floor, probably Floor I 1 Dermatemys mawii MSJ 15A 27 4 2 Fill below level of Floor I east of destroyed Wall 12, between Walls 13 and 25 1 Class unknown MSJ 15A 27 4 2 Fill below level of Floor I east of destroyed Wall 12, be tween Walls 13 and 25 3 Testudines MSJ 15A 28 1 1 Humus level down to exterior platform stones 1 Oliva sp., small MSJ 15A 28 1 1 Humus level down to exterior platform stones 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 15A 28 1 1 Humus level down to exterior platform stone s 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 15A 28 1 1 Humus level down to exterior platform stones 1 Strombidae MSJ 15A 29 1 2 Humus over platform and wall fall down to possible plaza floor found in unit 13 in 1999 1 Mammalia MSJ 15A 29 2 1 Wall fall above Floor J, in front of the lowest step 2 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 3 2 2 Wall fall and loose soil over stucco floor 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 15A 30 2 1 Wall fall above Floor D 1 Gastropoda, marine MSJ 15A 30 2 1 Wall fall above Floor D 1 Mammalia MSJ 15A 30 2 1 Wall f all above Floor D 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 30 3 3 Arbitrary fill lot below Floor D down to level of Floor E/E" 1 Pomacea flagellata

PAGE 104

104 Table B 3 Continued Provenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 15A 30 3 5 Arbitrary fill lot below level of Floo r E"/F 1 Pachychilus indiorum MSJ 15A 30 5 1 3 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 15A 31 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 15A 31 1 Mammalia, small/intermediate MSJ 15A 31 2 1 Wall fall over step riser, cleared to 10cm below Floor D 6 Mammalia MSJ 15A 31 2 1 Wall f all over step riser, cleared to 10cm below Floor D 1 Mammalia MSJ 15A 31 2 1 Wall fall over step riser, cleared to 10cm below Floor D 1 Mammalia MSJ 15A 31 2 1 Wall fall over step riser, cleared to 10cm below Floor D 1 Mollusca, marine MSJ 15A 31 2 1 Wa ll fall over step riser, cleared to 10cm below Floor D 1 Mollusca, marine MSJ 15A 31 2 1 Wall fall over step riser, cleared to 10cm below Floor D 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 15A 31 2 1 Wall fall over step riser, cleared to 10cm below Floor D 1 Testudines MSJ 1 5A 31 2 2 20 cm arbitrary fill lot in a 50x50cm area in front of step riser looking for its end 1 Homo sapiens MSJ 15A 31 2 2 20 cm arbitrary fill lot in a 50x50cm area in front of step riser looking for its end 14 Homo sapiens MSJ 15A 31 2 2 20 cm arbit rary fill lot in a 50x50cm area in front of step riser looking for its end 119 Homo sapiens MSJ 15A 31 2 2 20 cm arbitrary fill lot in a 50x50cm area in front of step riser looking for its end 1 Rodentia MSJ 15A 31 2 5 20 cm arbitrary fill lot below lot 4 1 Mollusca, marine MSJ 15A 31 2 5 20 cm arbitrary fill lot below lot 4 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 15A 31 2 5 20 cm arbitrary fill lot below lot 4 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 15A 31 3 10 Arbitrary fill lot 2 Mammalia MSJ 15A 31 3 4 20 cm arbitrary fill lot below lot 3 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 31 3 6 Arbitrary fill lot below level of Floor E"/F 1 Class unknown MSJ 15A 31 3 6 Arbitrary fill lot below level of Floor E"/F 1 Class unknown MSJ 15A 31 3 6 Arbitrary fill lot below level of Floor E"/F 1 Kinosternidae MSJ 15A 31 3 6 Arbitrary fill lot below level of Floor E"/F 5 Mammalia MSJ 15A 31 3 7 Arbitrary fill lot below exterior platform floor 1 Class unknown MSJ 15A 31 3 7 Arbitrary fill lot below exterior platform floor 1 Dermatemys mawii

PAGE 105

105 Table B 3 Continu ed Provenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 15A 31 3 7 Arbitrary fill lot below exterior platform floor 1 Mammalia MSJ 15A 31 3 8 Arbitrary fill lot below lot 7 1 Dermatemys mawii MSJ 15A 31 4 1 Fill of large rocks and almost no soil, stopping a t 2 low steps connecting with Floor J'/J, the first with stucco 1 Mammalia MSJ 15A 31 4 1 Fill of large rocks and almost no soil, stopping at 2 low steps connecting with Floor J'/J, the first with stucco 1 Mammalia MSJ 15A 31 4 2 Fill of large rocks with little soil down to a layer of stucco 1 Dermatemys mawii MSJ 15A 31 4 3 Fill of large rocks with more soil below stucco, stopping at Floor J', which is well preserved by Wall 15 1 Aves, small MSJ 15A 31 4 3 Fill of large rocks with more soil below stucc o, stopping at Floor J', which is well preserved by Wall 15 1 Dasypus novemcinctus MSJ 15A 31 4 3 Fill of large rocks with more soil below stucco, stopping at Floor J', which is well preserved by Wall 15 1 Kinosternidae MSJ 15A 31 4 3 Fill of large rocks with more soil below stucco, stopping at Floor J', which is well preserved by Wall 15 2 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 15A 31 4 4 Fill of large rocks with little soil stopping at Floor I of lowest terrace 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 32 1 1 Humus on platform and s tairway 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 15A 32 1 1 Humus on platform and stairway 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 15A 32 2 1 Wall fall along corner, with possible platform and/or step riser of late date 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 15A 34 2 1 Wall fall down to surrounding be nch level 1 Mollusca, marine MSJ 15A 34 2 1 Wall fall down to surrounding bench level 1 Prunum apicinum MSJ 15A 34 2 2 Wall fall above Floor B' up to the bench level inside South Rm 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 34 2 2 Wall fall above Floor B' up to the ben ch level inside South Rm 1 Strombidae MSJ 15A 34 2 3 Wall fall within doorway of upper room over interior Floor B' 3 Mammalia MSJ 15A 34 2 3 Wall fall within doorway of upper room over interior Floor B' 1 Mollusca, marine MSJ 15A 34 2 3 Wall fall within doorway of upper room over interior Floor B' 1 Rodentia, small MSJ 15A 35 2 1 Wall fall from western wall of upper room, down to stucco Floor B' 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 35 2 2 Wall fall in front of bench wall, going down to a large stone, to Floor B', and to Floor B", variously 3 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 36 1 1 Humus over wall fall from western wall and probably also from southern wall 1 Psoronaias sp.

PAGE 106

106 Table B 3 Continued Provenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 15A 36 2 1 Wall fall above e xterior floor, which appears to have been lost as mound collapsed slightly 1 Aves MSJ 15A 36 2 1 Wall fall above exterior floor, which appears to have been lost as mound collapsed slightly 1 Canis familiaris MSJ 15A 36 2 1 Wall fall above exterior floor, which appears to have been lost as mound collapsed slightly 1 Canis familiaris MSJ 15A 36 2 1 Wall fall above exterior floor, which appears to have been lost as mound collapsed slightly 1 Mammalia MSJ 15A 36 2 1 Wall fall above exterior floor, which app ears to have been lost as mound collapsed slightly 1 Mollusca, marine MSJ 15A 36 2 1 Wall fall above exterior floor, which appears to have been lost as mound collapsed slightly 1 Mollusca, marine MSJ 15A 36 2 1 Wall fall above exterior floor, which appea rs to have been lost as mound collapsed slightly 1 Mollusca, marine MSJ 15A 36 2 1 Wall fall above exterior floor, which appears to have been lost as mound collapsed slightly 1 Mollusca, marine MSJ 15A 36 2 1 Wall fall above exterior floor, which appears to have been lost as mound collapsed slightly 1 Mollusca, marine MSJ 15A 36 2 1 Wall fall above exterior floor, which appears to have been lost as mound collapsed slightly 1 Mollusca, marine MSJ 15A 36 2 1 Wall fall above exterior floor, which appears t o have been lost as mound collapsed slightly 1 Mollusca, marine MSJ 15A 36 2 1 Wall fall above exterior floor, which appears to have been lost as mound collapsed slightly 1 Mollusca, marine MSJ 15A 36 2 2 Wall fall not excavated in 2 1, with a two course step and a pillar 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 36 3 1 Arbitrary lot about 7 cm above exterior Floor D, to the south of doorway and southern wall of upper room 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 36 3 1 Arbitrary lot about 7 cm above exterior Floor D, t o the south of doorway and southern wall of upper room 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 36 3 1 Arbitrary lot about 7 cm above exterior Floor D, to the south of doorway and southern wall of upper room 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 36 3 2 Arbitrary 7 cm lot over exterior Floor D 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 36 3 2 Arbitrary 7 cm lot over exterior Floor D 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 37 2 1 Wall fall from southern wall of south room over exterior Floor D 9 Mammalia

PAGE 107

107 Table B 3 Continued Proveni ence Context info NISP Identification MSJ 15A 37 2 1 Wall fall from southern wall of south room over exterior Floor D 4 Mammalia MSJ 15A 37 2 1 Wall fall from southern wall of south room over exterior Floor D 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 37 2 1 Wall fall f rom southern wall of south room over exterior Floor D 1 Mollusca, marine MSJ 15A 37 2 1 Wall fall from southern wall of south room over exterior Floor D 1 Mollusca, marine MSJ 15A 37 2 1 Wall fall from southern wall of south room over exterior Floor D 1 Mollusca, marine MSJ 15A 37 2 1 Wall fall from southern wall of south room over exterior Floor D 1 Mollusca, marine MSJ 15A 37 2 1 Wall fall from southern wall of south room over exterior Floor D 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 37 2 1 Wall fall from so uthern wall of south room over exterior Floor D 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 37 2 1 Wall fall from southern wall of south room over exterior Floor D 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 37 2 1 Wall fall from southern wall of south room over exterior Floo r D 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 37 2 1 Wall fall from southern wall of south room over exterior Floor D 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 37 2 1 Wall fall from southern wall of south room over exterior Floor D 1 Osteichthyes MSJ 15A 37 2 1 Wall fall from southern wall of south room over exterior Floor D 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 15A 37 2 1 Wall fall from southern wall of south room over exterior Floor D 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 15A 37 2 1 Wall fall from southern wall of south room over exterior Floor D 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 15A 37 2 1 Wall fall from southern wall of south room over exterior Floor D 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 15A 37 2 1 Wall fall from southern wall of south room over exterior Floor D 1 Staurotypus triporcatus MSJ 15A 37 2 1 Wall fall from sou thern wall of south room over exterior Floor D 95 Vertebrata MSJ 15A 37 3 1 General collection of artifacts from close to or on exterior Floor D in southern half of unit 1 Galliform (smaller than turkey, not bobwhite or quail) MSJ 15A 37 3 1 General coll ection of artifacts from close to or on exterior Floor D in southern half of unit 2 Mammalia MSJ 15A 37 3 1 General collection of artifacts from close to or on exterior Floor D in southern half of unit 13 Mammalia MSJ 15A 37 3 1 General collection of art ifacts from close to or on exterior Floor D in southern half of unit 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 37 3 1 General collection of artifacts from close to or on exterior Floor D in southern half of unit 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 37 3 1 General collection of art ifacts from close to or on exterior Floor D in southern half of unit 1 Mammalia, large

PAGE 108

108 Table B 3 Continued Provenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 15A 37 3 1 General collection of artifacts from close to or on exterior Floor D in southern half of unit 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 37 3 1 General collection of artifacts from close to or on exterior Floor D in southern half of unit 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 37 3 1 General collection of artifacts from close to or on exterior Floor D in southern half of unit 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 37 3 1 General collection of artifacts from close to or on exterior Floor D in southern half of unit 1 Mazama americana MSJ 15A 37 3 1 General collection of artifacts from close to or on exterior Floor D in southern hal f of unit 1 Mazama americana MSJ 15A 37 3 1 General collection of artifacts from close to or on exterior Floor D in southern half of unit 1 Mazama americana MSJ 15A 37 3 1 General collection of artifacts from close to or on exterior Floor D in southern h alf of unit 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 37 3 1 General collection of artifacts from close to or on exterior Floor D in southern half of unit 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 37 3 1 General collection of artifacts from close to or on exterior Floor D in southern half of unit 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 37 3 2 Arbitrary horizontal lot of exterior Floor D to the south of the south wall of upper room 2 Mammalia MSJ 15A 37 3 2 Arbitrary horizontal lot of exterior Floor D to the south of the south w all of upper room 1 Mazama americana MSJ 15A 37 3 2 Arbitrary horizontal lot of exterior Floor D to the south of the south wall of upper room 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 37 3 2 Arbitrary horizontal lot of exterior Floor D to the south of the south w all of upper room 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 37 3 2, heavy #5 Arbitrary horizontal lot of exterior Floor D to the south of the south wall of upper room 2 Mammalia MSJ 15A 37 3 2, heavy #5 Arbitrary horizontal lot of exterior Floor D to the south of the south wall of upper room 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 15A 37 3 3 Arbitrary horizontal lot of exterior floor 1 Mammalia MSJ 15A 37 3 3 Arbitrary horizontal lot of exterior floor 1 Mammalia, very large MSJ 15A 37 3 3 Arbitrary horizontal lot of exter ior floor 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 37 3 3 Arbitrary horizontal lot of exterior floor 1 Odocoileus virginianus

PAGE 109

109 Table B 3 Continued Provenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 15A 37 3 3 Arbitrary horizontal lot of exterior floor 1 Odocoile us virginianus MSJ 15A 37 3 3 Arbitrary horizontal lot of exterior floor 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 37 3 3 Arbitrary horizontal lot of exterior floor 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 37 3 3 Arbitrary horizontal lot of exterior floor 1 Odocoileus v irginianus MSJ 15A 37 3 3 Arbitrary horizontal lot of exterior floor 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 38 1 1 Humus layer over wall fall from eastern wall of northern room 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 39 1 1 Humus over wall fall from eastern wall of norther n room 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 39 2 1 Wall fall over Floor C' from eastern wall of northern room 1 Cervidae MSJ 15A 39 2 1 Wall fall over Floor C' from eastern wall of northern room 1 Mollusca, marine MSJ 15A 39 2 1 Wall fall over Floor C' from easter n wall of northern room 1 Mollusca, marine MSJ 15A 39 2 1 Wall fall over Floor C' from eastern wall of northern room 1 Mollusca, marine MSJ 15A 39 2 1 Wall fall over Floor C' from eastern wall of northern room 1 Mollusca, marine MSJ 15A 39 2 1 Wall fall over Floor C' from eastern wall of northern room 1 Mollusca, marine MSJ 15A 39 2 1 Wall fall over Floor C' from eastern wall of northern room 1 Mollusca, marine MSJ 15A 39 2 1 Wall fall over Floor C' from eastern wall of northern room 1 Mollusca, marine MSJ 15A 39 2 1 Wall fall over Floor C' from eastern wall of northern room 1 Mollusca, marine MSJ 15A 39 2 1 Wall fall over Floor C' from eastern wall of northern room 1 Mollusca, marine MSJ 15A 39 2 1 Wall fall over Floor C' from eastern wall of northe rn room 1 Mollusca, marine MSJ 15A 39 2 1 Wall fall over Floor C' from eastern wall of northern room 1 Mollusca, marine MSJ 15A 39 2 1 Wall fall over Floor C' from eastern wall of northern room 1 Mollusca, marine MSJ 15A 39 2 1 Wall fall over Floor C' f rom eastern wall of northern room 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 39 2 1 Wall fall over Floor C' from eastern wall of northern room 1 Olivella perplexa MSJ 15A 39 2 1 Wall fall over Floor C' from eastern wall of northern room 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 1 5A 39 2 1 Wall fall over Floor C' from eastern wall of northern room 1 Prunum apicinum MSJ 15A 39 2 1 Wall fall over Floor C' from eastern wall of northern room 1 Prunum apicinum MSJ 15A 39 2 1 Wall fall over Floor C' from eastern wall of northern room 1 Prunum apicinum MSJ 15A 39 2 1 Wall fall over Floor C' from eastern wall of northern room 1 Prunum apicinum

PAGE 110

110 Table B 3 Continued Provenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 15A 39 2 1 Wall fall over Floor C' from eastern wall of northern room 1 P runum apicinum MSJ 15A 39 2 1 Wall fall over Floor C' from eastern wall of northern room 1 Prunum apicinum MSJ 15A 39 2 1 Wall fall over Floor C' from eastern wall of northern room 1 Prunum apicinum MSJ 15A 39 2 1 Wall fall over Floor C' from eastern wa ll of northern room 1 Prunum apicinum MSJ 15A 39 2 1 Wall fall over Floor C' from eastern wall of northern room 1 Prunum apicinum MSJ 15A 39 2 1 Wall fall over Floor C' from eastern wall of northern room 1 Strombus gigas/costatus MSJ 15A 4 1 1 Humus ove r wall fall 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 4 1 1 Humus over wall fall 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 4 1 1 Humus over wall fall 2 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 4 1 1 Humus over wall fall 14 Vertebrata MSJ 15A 4 2 1 Wall fall 1 Cervidae MSJ 15A 4 2 1 Wall fall 2 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 4 2 1 Wall fall 1 Pachychilus indiorum MSJ 15A 4 2 1 Wall fall 1 Pachychilus indiorum MSJ 15A 4 2 1 Wall fall 15 Vertebrata MSJ 15A 4 2 2 Wall fall above in stucco floor 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 4 1 1 1 Arbitrary humus lot over wall fall 1 Mammalia, large/intermediate MSJ 15A 41 1 1 Arbitrary humus lot over wall fall 1 Mammalia, small MSJ 15A 41 2 2 Arbitrary wall fall lot, with possible column 4 Mammalia MSJ 15A 41 2 2 Arbitrary wall fall lot, w ith possible column 4 Mammalia MSJ 15A 41 2 2 Arbitrary wall fall lot, with possible column 11 Mammalia MSJ 15A 41 2 2 Arbitrary wall fall lot, with possible column 2 Pachychilus indiorum MSJ 15A 41 2 2 Arbitrary wall fall lot, with possible column 2 Po macea flagellata MSJ 15A 41 2 3 Arbitrary wall fall lot with round column, step, and stucco Floor L 1 Gastropoda, marine MSJ 15A 41 2 3 Arbitrary wall fall lot with round column, step, and stucco Floor L 1 Mammalia MSJ 15A 41 2 3 Arbitrary wall fall lot with round column, step, and stucco Floor L 2 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 15A 41 2 3 Arbitrary wall fall lot with round column, step, and stucco Floor L 1 Mammalia, small MSJ 15A 41 2 3 Arbitrary wall fall lot with round column, step, and stucco Floor L 2 Mammalia, small MSJ 15A 41 2 3 Arbitrary wall fall lot with round column, step, and stucco Floor L 1 Mammalia, very large MSJ 15A 41 2 5 2 Homo sapiens MSJ 15A 41 2 5 1 Mammalia MSJ 15A 41 3 4 Floor M, which is in fact Floor D from unit 37 (2000) 1 Cervidae

PAGE 111

111 Table B 3 Continued Provenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 15A 41 3 4 Floor M, which is in fact Floor D from unit 37 (2000) 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 41 3 4 Floor M, which is in fact Floor D from unit 37 (2000) 7 Mammalia, large M SJ 15A 41 3 4 Floor M, which is in fact Floor D from unit 37 (2000) 3 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 41 3 4 Floor M, which is in fact Floor D from unit 37 (2000) 6 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 41 3 4 Floor M, which is in fact Floor D from unit 37 (2000) 4 Pom acea flagellata MSJ 15A 41 3 4 Floor M, which is in fact Floor D from unit 37 (2000) 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 15A 42 2 2 1 Pachychilus indiorum MSJ 15A 42 3 3 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 43 2 2 Arbitrary wall fall lot 7 Class unknown MSJ 15A 43 2 3 Arbitr ary wall fall lot, stopping 5 cm above a floor (Floor L?) 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 43 2 3 Arbitrary wall fall lot, stopping 5 cm above a floor (Floor L?) 6 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 43 2 3 Arbitrary wall fall lot, stopping 5 cm above a floor (Floor L?) 1 Rodentia MSJ 15A 43 2 3 Arbitrary wall fall lot, stopping 5 cm above a floor (Floor L?) 2 Rodentia MSJ 15A 44 3 1 Fill between Floors D and E', with some wall fall mixed in 1 Dasypus novemcinctus MSJ 15A 45 2 3 Arbitrary wall fall lot over Floor L 1 Mam malia, large MSJ 15A 45 2 3 Arbitrary wall fall lot over Floor L 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 15A 46 2 2 Arbitrary wall fall lot 1 Pachychilus indiorum MSJ 15A 46 2 3 Arbitrary wall fall lot 23 Mammalia MSJ 15A 46 2 4 Arbitrary wall fall lot, stopping 5 cm abo ve Floor L 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 46 2 6 Wall fall 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 47 2 2 Wall fall on Floor L 2 Class unknown MSJ 15A 47 2 2 Wall fall on Floor L 1 Mammalia MSJ 15A 47 2 2 Wall fall on Floor L 3 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 47 2 2 Wall fall on Floor L 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 47 2 2 Wall fall on Floor L 1 Mammalia, small MSJ 15A 47 2 2 Wall fall on Floor L 1 Oliva sp., small MSJ 15A 47 2 2 Wall fall on Floor L 1 Strombidae

PAGE 112

112 Table B 3 Continued Provenience Context info NISP Identif ication MSJ 15A 48 2 2 Wall fall 9 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 48 2 2 Wall fall 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 48 2 2 Wall fall 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 48 3 3 3 Wall fall from interior room 1 17 Mammalia MSJ 15A 48 3 3 3 Wall fall from interior room 1 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 15A 48 3 3 3 Wall fall from interior room 1 3 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 48 5 4 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 48 5 4 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 49 2 2 Wall fall above Floor L 2 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 5 2 1 Wall fall along east west wall, above bench inside South Room 3 Mammalia MSJ 15A 5 2 1 Wall fall along east west wall, above bench inside South Room 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 5 2 1 Wall fall along east west wall, above bench inside South Room 1 Mammalia large/intermediate MSJ 15A 5 2 1 Wall fall along east west wall, above bench inside South Room 1 Mazama americana MSJ 15A 5 2 1 Wall fall along east west wall, above bench inside South Room 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 5 2 1 Wall fall along east w est wall, above bench inside South Room 1 Pachychilus glaphyrus MSJ 15A 5 2 1 Wall fall along east west wall, above bench inside South Room 1 Pachychilus indiorum MSJ 15A 5 2 1 Wall fall along east west wall, above bench inside South Room 2 Pomacea flage llata MSJ 15A 5 2 3 2 Mammalia MSJ 15A 50 2 2 Wall fall above bench 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 50 2 2 Wall fall above bench 1 Sylvilagus sp. MSJ 15A 50 3 4 Fill from bench 3 Canis familiaris MSJ 15A 50 3 4 Fill from bench 4 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 15A 50 3 4 Fill from bench 10 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 15A 50 3 4 Fill from bench 2 Mammalia, small/intermediate MSJ 15A 50 3 5 Fill from bench 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 51 2 2 Wall fall 1 Cervidae MSJ 15A 51 2 2 Wall fall 1 Mammalia, intermediate

PAGE 113

113 Table B 3 Continued Provenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 15A 51 2 2 Wall fall 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 15A 51 2 2 Wall fall 3 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 15A 51 2 2 Wall fall 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 51 2 2 Wall fall 2 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 51 2 2 Wall fall 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 51 2 2 Wall fall 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 51 2 2 Wall fall 1 Mammalia, large/intermediate MSJ 15A 51 2 2 Wall fall 65 Mammalia, large/intermediate MSJ 15A 51 2 2 Wall fall 1 Mammalia, small MSJ 15A 51 2 2 Wall fall 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 51 2 2 Wall fall 2 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 51 2 2 Wall fall 4 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 51 2 2 Wall fall 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 51 3 3 Bench and the 5 cm above it 1 Aves MSJ 15A 51 3 3 Bench and the 5 cm above it 8 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 51 3 3 Bench and the 5 cm above it 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 51 3 3 Bench and the 5 cm above it 3 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 52 1 1 Humus over wall fall from east wall of north room 1 Cichlidae MSJ 15A 52 1 1 Humus over wall fall from east wall of north room 1 Cichlidae MSJ 15A 52 1 1 Humus over wall fall from east wall of north room 1 Dasypus novemcinctus MSJ 15A 52 1 1 Humus over wall fall from east wall of north room 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 1 5A 52 1 1 Humus over wall fall from east wall of north room 2 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 52 1 1 Humus over wall fall from east wall of north room 1 Mammalia, large/intermediate MSJ 15A 52 1 1 Humus over wall fall from east wall of north room 3 Pachychilus i ndiorum MSJ 15A 52 1 1 Humus over wall fall from east wall of north room 7 Pachychilus indiorum MSJ 15A 52 1 1 Humus over wall fall from east wall of north room 50 Pachychilus indiorum MSJ 15A 52 1 1 Humus over wall fall from east wall of north room 1 S taurotypus triporcatus

PAGE 114

114 Table B 3 Continued Provenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 15A 52 1 1 Humus over wall fall from east wall of north room 4 Testudines MSJ 15A 52 1 1 Humus over wall fall from east wall of north room 2 Viperidae MSJ 15A 52 2 2 Arbitrary wall fall lot 5 Pachychilus indiorum MSJ 15A 52 3 2 Arbitrary wall fall lot 2 Mammalia, small MSJ 15A 53 2 2 Wall fall with a 30 cm bulk 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 15A 53 2 2 Wall fall with a 30 cm bulk 4 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 15A 53 2 2 Wall fall with a 30 cm bulk 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 15A 53 2 2 Wall fall with a 30 cm bulk 1 Pachychilus indiorum MSJ 15A 53 2 2 Wall fall with a 30 cm bulk 1 Prunum apicinum MSJ 15A 53 2 3 Arbitrary wall fall lot 1 Mammalia, large/inter mediate MSJ 15A 53 2 3 Arbitrary wall fall lot 5 Mammalia, large/intermediate MSJ 15A 53 2 3 Arbitrary wall fall lot 2 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 55 1 1 Humus over east wall and wall fall from east wall of north room 2 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 15A 56 1 1 Humus over wall fall from east wall of north room (following the exterior face of this wall) 6 Pachychilus indiorum MSJ 15A 56 2 1 Wall fall from east wall, which found Floor A", 20cm above Floor C' 2 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 56 2 2 Wall fall from ea st wall down to Floor C' 1 Gastropoda, marine MSJ 15A 56 2 2 Wall fall from east wall down to Floor C' 1 Pachychilus indiorum MSJ 15A 56 2 2 Wall fall from east wall down to Floor C' 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 15A 56 3 1 Floor C' to the south of interior face of Wall 28 1 Mammalia MSJ 15A 56 3 1 Floor C' to the south of interior face of Wall 28 1 Strombidae MSJ 15A 56 3 3 Fill below Floor A", exploring Walls 28 and 29 3 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 56 3 3 Fill below Floor A", exploring Walls 28 and 29 1 Pachychi lus indiorum MSJ 15A 56 3 8 Fill of Wall 28, in the east half where its outer face rested on Floor A", down to Floor D and following Floor A" 1 Dasypus novemcinctus MSJ 15A 57 2 3 Wall fall over bench 1 Mammalia, large/intermediate MSJ 15A 57 2 3 Wall f all over bench 5 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 15A 57 2 3 Wall fall over bench 1 Prunum apicinum

PAGE 115

115 Table B 3 Continued Provenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 15A 57 3 5 Floor L 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 15A 57 3 5 Floor L 3 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 57 3 5 Floor L 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15A 58 1 1 Humus over fill of possible Postclassic construction 1 Mammalia MSJ 15A 58 1 1 Humus over fill of possible Postclassic construction 6 Pachychilus indiorum MSJ 15A 58 2 1 Arbitrary lot of p robable platform fill stopping at level of Floor C' in adjacent unit 52, which didn't appear 1 Dasyprocta punctata MSJ 15A 59 2 2 Wall fall over bench 1 Dasyprocta punctata MSJ 15A 59 2 2 Wall fall over bench 2 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 59 2 2 Wall fall o ver bench 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 59 2 2 Wall fall over bench 1 Mammalia, small/intermediate MSJ 15A 6 2 2 Fill next to north wall 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 15A 6 3 1 Fill between Floors B and C, although arbitrary because B was not found in this parti cular unit 1 Mammalia, small MSJ 15A 6 3 1 Fill between Floors B and C, although arbitrary because B was not found in this particular unit 1 Mammalia, small MSJ 15A 60 1 1 Humus over Wall 28 and wall fall to the south 1 Pachychilus indiorum MSJ 15A 60 1 1 Humus over Wall 28 and wall fall to the south 14 Pachychilus indiorum MSJ 15A 61 1 1 Humus over wall fall 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 15A 61 1 1 Humus over wall fall 10 Mammalia, large MSJ 15A 61 1 1 Humus over wall fall 2 Mammalia, large/intermedia te MSJ 15A 61 1 1 Humus over wall fall 1 Mammalia, small MSJ 15A 61 1 1 Humus over wall fall 1 Testudines MSJ 15A 8 2 3 Arbitrary wall fall lot ended at level of Floor B in the no rthern room 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 15A 8 3 1 Loose earth on top of Floor C 1 Agouti paca MSJ 15A 8 3 1 Loose earth on top of Floor C 1 Agouti paca MSJ 15A 8 3 1 Loose earth on top of Floor C 1 Serpentes MSJ 15A 9 5 2 Arbitrary lot of fill in front of a possible platform wall 2 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 15A:Tomb 3 Stauro typus triporcatus MSJ 15A:Tomb 1 Staurotypus triporcatus MSJ 15A:Tomb 1 Staurotypus triporcatus MSJ 15B 1 3 1 fill ending in plaster floor 1 Canis familiaris MSJ 15B 1 3 1 fill ending in plaster floor 3 idable mammal

PAGE 116

116 Table B 3 Continued Provenienc e Context info NISP Identification MSJ 15B 1 3 1 fill ending in plaster floor 6 Mammalia MSJ 15B 1 3 1 fill ending in plaster floor 1 Mammalia MSJ 15B 1 3 1 fill ending in plaster floor 1 Mammalia MSJ 15B 1 3 1 fill ending in plaster floor 8 Mammalia, large/intermediate MSJ 15B 1 3 1 fill ending in plaster floor 1 Mazama americana MSJ 15B 1 3 1 fill ending in plaster floor 1 Mazama americana MSJ 15B 1 3 1 fill ending in plaster floor 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15B 1 3 1 fill ending in plaster floo r 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15B 1 3 1 fill ending in plaster floor 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15B 1 3 1 fill ending in plaster floor 3 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15B 1 3 1 fill ending in plaster floor 3 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15B 1 3 1 fill en ding in plaster floor 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15B 1 3 1 fill ending in plaster floor 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15B 1 3 1 fill ending in plaster floor 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15B 1 3 1 fill ending in plaster floor 1 Odocoileus virginianus M SJ 15B 1 3 1 fill ending in plaster floor 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15B 1 3 1 fill ending in plaster floor 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 15B 1 3 1 fill ending in plaster floor 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 15B 1 3 1 fill ending in plaster floor 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 1 5B 1 4 8 1 Mammalia MSJ 15B 1 4 8 1 Mammalia, small MSJ 15B 1 4 8 1 Mazama americana MSJ 15B 1 4 8 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 15B 1 4 8 1 Sylvilagus floridanus MSJ 15B 1 4 9 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15B 1 5 4 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 15B 3 1 1 1 Tayassuidae MSJ 15B 3 1 1 1 Tayassuidae MSJ 15C 26 1 1 Humus with rocks at bottom of lot, probably floor 1 Mammalia MSJ 15C 26 1 1 Humus with rocks at bottom of lot, probably floor 1 Mammalia, small/intermediate MSJ 15C 3 1 2 Humus 1 Testudines MSJ 1 5D 101 1 3 Humus with piedrine 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 15D 103 1 1 Humus with piedrine 1 Mammalia, large/intermediate MSJ 15D 45 2 2 2 Class unknown MSJ 15D 45 2 2 2 Mammalia MSJ 15D 45 2 2 1 Mammalia, large/intermediate MSJ 15D 45 2 2 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15D 45 2 2 4 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 15E 8 1 2 Humus with medium rocks 1 Testudines MSJ 16A 1 1 1 humus, some fill/medium rock, stone tool in W wall 1 Pachychilus indiorum MSJ 16A 1 2 1 fill, bone at bottom of level near middle of E wall 1 Class unknown MSJ 16A 1 2 1 fill, bone at bottom of level near middle of E wall 1 Class unknown

PAGE 117

117 Table B 3 Continued Provenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 16A 1 2 1 fill, bone at bottom of level near middle of E wall 1 Class unknown MSJ 16A 1 2 1 fill, bone at bottom of level near middle of E wall 1 Homo sapiens MSJ 16A 1 2 1 fill, bone at bottom of level near middle of E wall 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 16A 1 2 1 fill, bone at bottom of level near middle of E wall 1 Odocoileus virginian us MSJ 16A 1 2 1 fill, bone at bottom of level near middle of E wall 1 Pachychilus indiorum MSJ 16A 1 3 1 piedrine/small rock fill, more bone E side, bottom 7 cm at E looks like floor 1 Homo sapiens MSJ 16A 1 3 1 piedrine/small rock fill, more bone E s ide, bottom 7 cm at E looks like floor 1 Homo sapiens MSJ 16A 1 3 1 piedrine/small rock fill, more bone E side, bottom 7 cm at E looks like floor 16 Mammalia, large MSJ 16A 1 4 1 bone E side, hit floor/bedrock throughout 1 Homo sapiens MSJ 16A 1 4 1 bo ne E side, hit floor/bedrock throughout 2 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 16A 1 4 1 bone E side, hit floor/bedrock throughout 4 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 16A 1 4 1 bone E side, hit floor/bedrock throughout 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 16A 1 4 1 bone E side, hit fl oor/bedrock throughout 5 Mammalia, large MSJ 16A 1 4 1 bone E side, hit floor/bedrock throughout 1 Mammalia, small MSJ 17B 10 1 1 humus, raices, rock fill 1 Dasypus novemcinctus MSJ 17B 10 1 1 humus, raices, rock fill 1 Dasypus novemcinctus MSJ 17B 14 2 1 fill 1 Mammalia MSJ 17B 14 2 1 fill 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 17B 14 2 1 fill 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 17B 14 3 1 n/a 1 Reptilia, large/intermediate MSJ 17B 14 3 3 fill 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 17B 15 2 2 midden, fill 1 Didelphidae MSJ 17B 15 2 2 midden, fill 1 Mazama americana MSJ 17B 15 2 2 midden, fill 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 17B 15 2 2 midden, fill 1 Sciuridae MSJ 17B 15 2 2 midden, fill 1 Sylvilagus floridanus MSJ 17B 15 2 2 midden, fill 1 Sylvilagus sp.

PAGE 118

118 Table B 3 Continued Pr ovenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 17D 11 1 1 humus 1 Dasypus novemcinctus MSJ 17D 14 3 2 1 Mammalia, large/intermediate MSJ 17D 14 3 2 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 17D 14 3 2 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 17D 14 3 2 1 Odocoileus virgin ianus MSJ 17D 14 3 2 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 17D 17 1 2 humus, raices 1 Mammalia MSJ 17D 18 1 1 humus 1 Testudines MSJ 17D 18 1 2 midden, fill 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 17D 18 1 2 midden, fill 1 Trachemys scripta MSJ 17D 18 1 2 midden, fill 1 Trachemys scripta MSJ 17D 18 1 2 midden, fill 1 Trachemys scripta MSJ 17D 18 1 2 midden, fill 1 Trachemys scripta MSJ 17D 19 1 2 raices, black earth, medium rocks 1 Cervidae MSJ 17D 19 1 2 raices, black earth, medium rocks 1 Mammalia, intermediate M SJ 17D 6 1 3 fill 1 Mammalia MSJ 18A 5 1 2 humus, fill at bottom 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 18B 5 1 2 humus, fill at bottom 1 Dermatemys mawii MSJ 18B 5 1 2 humus, fill at bottom 1 Testudines MSJ 19A 10 1 1 1 Testudines MSJ 19A 2 1 1 humus, possibly top o f midden, possible floor or fill at 20cm 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 19A 2 1 1 humus, possibly top of midden, possible floor or fill at 20cm 1 Mammalia, very large MSJ 19A 2 1 2 fill 4 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 19A 3 1 1 humus, some sm rock, found lg limesto ne rock at 20cm 1 Testudines MSJ 19A 3 1 1 humus, some sm rock, found lg limestone rock at 20cm 1 Testudines MSJ 19A 3 1 1 humus, some sm rock, found lg limestone rock at 20cm 1 Testudines MSJ 19A 6 1 1 humus 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 19A 6 1 1 humu s 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 19A 6 1 1 humus 1 Mammalia, small MSJ 19A 6 1 1 humus 1 Meleagrididae MSJ 19A 6 1 1 humus 1 Testudines MSJ 19A 6 1 1 humus 1 Testudines MSJ 19A 6 1 1 humus 1 Testudines

PAGE 119

119 Table B 3 Continued Provenience Context info NIS P Identification MSJ 19A 6 1 1 humus 1 Testudines MSJ 19A 6 1 2 fill below possible midden 3 Mammalia MSJ 19A 6 1 2 fill below possible midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 19A 6 1 2 fill below possible midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 19B 4 2 2 fil l of sm and lg rock (limestone) 1 Orthogeomys hispidus MSJ 19B 9 1 humus 1 Tayassidae MSJ 1A 1 4 1 lg rock (floor fill or collapse?) in northern end, 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 1A 1 5 1 sizable rocks, bone deposits in SE corner 2 Mammalia, large/interme diate MSJ 1A 1 5 1 sizable rocks, bone deposits in SE corner 1 Mammalia, large/intermediate MSJ 1A 1 5 1 sizable rocks, bone deposits in SE corner 3 Mammalia, large/intermediate MSJ 1A 1 6 1 bedrock hit at S end 1 Agouti paca MSJ 1A 1 6 1 bedrock h it at S end 1 Canis sp. MSJ 1A 1 6 1 bedrock hit at S end 1 Dermatemys mawii MSJ 1A 1 6 1 bedrock hit at S end 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 1A 1 6 1 bedrock hit at S end 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 1A 1 6 1 bedrock hit at S end 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 1A 1 6 1 bedrock hit at S end 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 1A 1 6 1 bedrock hit at S end 2 Mammalia, large MSJ 1A 1 6 1 bedrock hit at S end 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 1A 1 6 1 bedrock hit at S end 1 Mazama americana MSJ 1A 1 6 1 bedrock hit at S end 1 Odocoileus virgi nianus MSJ 1A 1 6 1 bedrock hit at S end 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 1A 1 6 1 bedrock hit at S end 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 1A 1 6 1 bedrock hit at S end 1 Testudines MSJ 1A 1 6 1 bedrock hit at S end 1 Trachemys scripta MSJ 1A 2 7 1 lg stone fill w/ grey brown soil, level ends in possible piedrene floor 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 1A 2 7 1 lg stone fill w/ grey brown soil, level ends in possible piedrene floor 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 1A 2 7 1 lg stone fill w/ grey brown soil, level ends in possible p iedrene floor 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 20B 3 1 1 humus, some rock 1 Oliva sayana MSJ 20B 3 2 2 piedrine piedra caliza 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 20B 3 2 2 piedrine piedra caliza 1 Strombidae MSJ 20B 4 1 1 humus, fill, on edge of low density midden 1 Mammal ia, large MSJ 20B 4 1 1 humus, fill, on edge of low density midden 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 20D 2 1 1 humus, fill, low density midden 1 Mammalia MSJ 20F 3 1 2 humus 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 20F 3 1 2 humus 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 20N 5 1 1 2 Pomacea flagella ta MSJ 26D 1 1 1 humus, lg rocks at 20cm, sterile except for 2 bones 1 Dasypus novemcinctus MSJ 26D 1 1 1 humus, lg rocks at 20cm, sterile except for 2 bones 2 Dasypus novemcinctus MSJ 29A 1 1 1 humus, medium and small rocks 2 Mammalia, large MSJ 29A 6 heavy #127 6 Mammalia, small MSJ 29B 1 1 3 humus, big and medium rocks 1 Gastropoda MSJ 29B 1 1 3 humus, big and medium rocks 1 Mammalia, large

PAGE 120

120 Table B 3 Continued Provenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 29B 1 1 3 humus, big and medium roc ks 1 Pachychilus glaphyrus MSJ 29C 10 1 1 humus 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 29C 10 2 2 humus, medium and small rocks 2 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 29D 1 1 2 humus 1 Felidae, large MSJ 29D 1 1 2 humus 1 Felidae, large MSJ 29D 1 1 2 humus 1 Mammalia, large MS J 29D 1 3 8 black earth, small rocks, and limestone 1 Olividae MSJ 29E 1 3 7 irregular big rocks 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 29F 10 2 2 Wall fall and roof fall 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 29F 10 2 2 Wall fall and roof fall 17 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 29F 10 2 2 Wall fall and roof fall 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 29F 10 2 2 Wall fall and roof fall 2 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 29F 10 2 2 Wall fall and roof fall 4 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 29F 10 2 2 Wall fall and roof fall 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 29F 10 2 2 Wall fall and roof fall 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 29F 10 2 2 Wall fall and roof fall 1 Mammalia, large/intermediate MSJ 29F 2 1 1 Platform fill of ballast most prominent in center of unit 5 Dasypus novemcinctus MSJ 29F 2 1 1 Platform fill of ball ast most prominent in center of unit 1 Dasypus novemcinctus MSJ 29F 2 3 3 Floor on west side of unit after removing wall fall 1 Mammalia MSJ 29F 3 2 3 Wall fall with traces of orange red paint on stucco floor 1 Cricetidae MSJ 29F 3 2 3 Wall fall with tr aces of orange red paint on stucco floor 1 Dasypus novemcinctus MSJ 29F 3 2 3 Wall fall with traces of orange red paint on stucco floor 1 Mammalia MSJ 29F 3 2 3 Wall fall with traces of orange red paint on stucco floor 1 Mammalia MSJ 29F 4 2 4 Wall fall and roof fall 1 Canis familiaris, small MSJ 29F 5 2 2 Wall fall 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 29F 6 1 1 Humus over wall fall 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 29F 6 2 3 Wall fall and roof fall 4 Mammalia, large MSJ 29F 7 2 3 Wall fall and roof fall 1 Bufo s p. MSJ 29F 9 1 1 Humus over structure wall and roof fall 2 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 29F 9 1 1 Humus over structure wall and roof fall 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 29F 9 2 2 Wall fall and roof fall 1 Homo sapiens MSJ 29F 9 2 2 Wall fall and roof fall 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 29F 9 2 2 Wall fall and roof fall 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 29F 9 2 3 Wall fall and roof fall 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 29F 9 2 3 Wall fall and roof fall 2 Mammalia, large MSJ 29F 9 2 3 Wall fall and roof fall 3 Mammalia, large MSJ 29F 9 2 3 Wal l fall and roof fall 1 Odocoileus virginianus

PAGE 121

121 Table B 3 Continued Provenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 29G 1 1 1 Humus 6 Testudines MSJ 29G 1 1 1 Humus 2 Testudines MSJ 29G 1 1 3 Exterior Floor Humus level 1 Mammalia MSJ 29G 1 1 3 Exteri or Floor Humus level 1 Mammalia MSJ 29G 1 1 3 Exterior Floor Humus level 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 29G 1 1 3 Exterior Floor Humus level 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 29G 10 2 2 Wall fall 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 29G 12 2 2 Wall fall 1 Gastropoda, marine MSJ 29G 2 3 5 Wall fall 1 Mammalia MSJ 29G 4 2 2 Wall fall 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 29G 5 1 1 Humus 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 29G 8 1 1 Humus 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 29G 8 2 2 Wall fall with two walls and sub humus soil 2 Serpentes MSJ 29G 9 1 1 Humus 1 Pomacea flag ellata MSJ 29G 9 2 4 Exterior Floor on top of first stair in North unit 1 Mammalia MSJ 2A 1 4 5 Plaza II 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 1 4 5 Plaza II 1 Mazama americana MSJ 2A 1 4 5 Plaza II 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 1 4 5 Plaza II 14 Osteichthyes M SJ 2A 1 4 5 Plaza II 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 2A 1 6 1 Plaza II 1 Gastropoda MSJ 2A 1 6 1 Plaza II 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 2A 1 6 1 Plaza II 1 Psoronaias MSJ 2A 1 7 1 Plaza II 3 Gastropoda MSJ 2A 1 7 1 Plaza II 3 idable MSJ 2A 1 7 1 Plaza II 4 Mamma lia MSJ 2A 1 7 1 Plaza II 5 Mammalia MSJ 2A 1 7 1 Plaza II 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 1 7 1 Plaza II 1 Mazama americana MSJ 2A 1 7 1 Plaza II 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 1 7 1 Plaza II 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 1 7 1 Plaza II 1 Odocoileus vir ginianus MSJ 2A 1 7 1 Plaza II 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 2A 1 7 1 Plaza II 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 2A 1 8 1 Plaza II 1 Canis familiaris MSJ 2A 1 8 1 Plaza II 1 Mammalia MSJ 2A 1 8 1 Plaza II 2 Mammalia MSJ 2A 1 8 1 Plaza II 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 1 8 1 Plaza II 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 2A 1/2 1 thru 10 Plaza II 1 idable MSJ 2A 1/2 1 thru 10 Plaza II 1 Mammalia MSJ 2A 1/2 1 thru 10 Plaza II 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 1/2 10 1 Plaza II 5 Class unknown MSJ 2A 1/2 10 1 Plaza II 1 idable

PAGE 122

122 Table B 3 Cont inued Provenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 2A 1/2 10 1 Plaza II 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 1/2 10 1 Plaza II 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 1/2 10 1 Plaza II 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 1/2 10 1 Plaza II 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 2A 1/2 11 1 Plaza II 6 Mammalia MSJ 2A 10 1 1 Humus over bench y back wall 1 Kinosternidae MSJ 2A 11 2 7 Wall fall 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 2A 12 3 4 Over bench surface; SE quadrant 1 Gastropoda, marine MSJ 2A 12 3 4 Over bench surface; SE quadrant 1 Strombus alatus MSJ 2A 13 2 1 Wall fall over bench and back wall 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 13 2 1 Wall fall over bench and back wall 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 14 2 1 Wall fall over ext floor near front wall 1 Aves MSJ 2A 15 2 1 Wall fall over ext. floor 1 Gallif orm (smaller than turkey, not bobwhite or quail) MSJ 2A 15 2 1 Wall fall over ext. floor 1 Strombidae MSJ 2A 2 4 1 Plaza II 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 2 6 1 Plaza II 1 Mammalia MSJ 2A 2 6 1 Plaza II 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 2 6 1 Plaza II 1 Mammalia, la rge MSJ 2A 2 6 1 Plaza II 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 2 6 1 Plaza II 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 2 7 1 Plaza II 1 Dermatemys mawii MSJ 2A 2 7 1 Plaza II 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 2 8 1 Plaza II 1 Artiodactyla MSJ 2A 2 8 1 Plaza II 6 Mam malia MSJ 2A 2 8 1 Plaza II 1 Mammalia MSJ 2A 2 9 1 Plaza II 1 Cervidae MSJ 2A 2 9 1 Plaza II 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 2 9 1 Plaza II 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 2 9 1 Plaza II 2 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 2 9 1 Plaza II 3 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 2 9 1 Plaz a II 1 Mazama americana MSJ 2A 20 2 1 Wall fall within E part Rm 3 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 21 2 1 Wall fall, in W Rm2 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 24 2 1 Wall fall outside str by doorjamb 1 Dasypus novemcinctus MSJ 2A 24 2 1 Wall fall outside str by doorj amb 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 26 2 2 Wall fall inside E Rm2; E half 1 Canis familiaris MSJ 2A 26 2 2 Wall fall inside E Rm2; E half 1 Mollusca, marine MSJ 2A 26 2 2 Wall fall inside E Rm2; E half 1 Mollusca, marine MSJ 2A 26 2 2 Wall fall inside E Rm2; E half 1 Mollusca, marine MSJ 2A 26 2 2 Wall fall inside E Rm2; E half 1 Mollusca, marine MSJ 2A 26 2 2 Wall fall inside E Rm2; E half 1 Mollusca, marine MSJ 2A 26 2 2 Wall fall inside E Rm2; E half 1 Mollusca, marine MSJ 2A 26 2 2 Wall fall inside E R m2; E half 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 3 10 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 idable MSJ 2A 3 10 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 4 Mammalia MSJ 2A 3 10 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 3 10 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Mamm alia, large MSJ 2A 3 10 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus

PAGE 123

123 Table B 3 Continued Provenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 2A 3 10 thru 12 s 8 Class unknown MSJ 2A 3 10 thru 12 s 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 2A 3 11 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 3 11 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 3 11 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Trachemys scripta MSJ 2A 3 12 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Crocodylus sp. MSJ 2A 3 12 1 Floo r fill, secondary midden 1 Mammalia MSJ 2A 3 12 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 8 Mammalia MSJ 2A 3 12 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 7 Mammalia MSJ 2A 3 12 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 2 Mammalia MSJ 2A 3 12 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Odocoile us virginianus MSJ 2A 3 12 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 3 12 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 3 12 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 3 12 1 Floor fill, seconda ry midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 3 12 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 3 12 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 3 12 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 3 12 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 3 12 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 2A 3 12 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 2A 3 12 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 2A 3 12 1 Flo or fill, secondary midden 1 Testudines MSJ 2A 3 12 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Testudines MSJ 2A 3 12 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Trachemys scripta MSJ 2A 3 12 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Trachemys scripta MSJ 2A 3 13 1 Floor fill, secon dary midden 1 Crocodylus sp. MSJ 2A 3 13 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Crocodylus sp. MSJ 2A 3 13 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Crocodylus sp. MSJ 2A 3 13 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 3 14 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Canis familiaris MSJ 2A 3 14 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 3 15 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Canis familiaris MSJ 2A 3 15 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Canis familiaris MSJ 2A 3 15 1 Floor fill, secondary midd en 1 Dasyprocta punctata MSJ 2A 3 15 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Dermatemys mawii MSJ 2A 3 15 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Dermatemys mawii MSJ 2A 3 15 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Mammalia MSJ 2A 3 15 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Mamm alia, large/intermediate MSJ 2A 3 15 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 2A 3 16 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Dermatemys mawii MSJ 2A 3 16 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Dermatemys mawii MSJ 2A 3 16 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Dermatemys mawii MSJ 2A 3 16 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Dermatemys mawii MSJ 2A 3 16 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Dermatemys mawii MSJ 2A 3 16 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Dermatemys mawii MSJ 2A 3 16 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Fe lis pardalis MSJ 2A 3 16 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 2 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 3 16 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Mammalia, large/intermediate MSJ 2A 3 16 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 3 16 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 3 16 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 3 Odocoileus virginianus

PAGE 124

124 Table B 3 Continued Provenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 2A 3 16 1 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Testudines MSJ 2A 3 16 1 (fill beneath p laza floor) Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 3 16 1:2 Floor fill, secondary midden 1 Mammalia MSJ 2A 3 18 1 Fill with midden 17 Class unknown MSJ 2A 3 18 1 Fill with midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 3 18 1 Fill with mi dden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 3 18 1 Fill with midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 3 18 1 Fill with midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 3 18 1 Fill with midden 1 Testudines MSJ 2A 3 19 1 Midden 1 Felidae, large MSJ 2A 3 19 1 Midden 1 Odoc oileus virginianus MSJ 2A 3 19 1 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 3 19 1 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 3 6 2 Platform fill 1 Canis familiaris MSJ 2A 3 6 2 Platform fill 2 idable MSJ 2A 3 6 2 Platform fill 1 Mammalia MSJ 2A 3 6 2 Platfo rm fill 1 Mammalia MSJ 2A 3 6 2 Platform fill 1 Testudines MSJ 2A 3 7 1 Stucco floor and floor fill 1 Class unknown MSJ 2A 3 7 1 Stucco floor and floor fill 1 Felidae, large MSJ 2A 3 7 1 Stucco floor and floor fill 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 3 7 1 Stucc o floor and floor fill 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 3 7 1 Stucco floor and floor fill 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 2A 3 8 1 Floor fill with some secondary midden 1 Dasypus novemcinctus MSJ 2A 3 8 1 Floor fill with some secondary midden 1 Dasypus novemcinctus MSJ 2A 3 8 1 Floor fill with some secondary midden 1 Dasypus novemcinctus MSJ 2A 3 8 1 Floor fill with some secondary midden 3 Mammalia MSJ 2A 3 8 1 Floor fill with some secondary midden 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 3 8 1 Floor fill with some secondary mi dden 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 3 9 1 Thick stucco floor and floor fill, secondary midden 1 Dermatemys mawii MSJ 2A 3 9 1 Thick stucco floor and floor fill, secondary midden 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 3 9 1 Thick stucco floor and floor fill, secondary midde n 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 3 9 1 Thick stucco floor and floor fill, secondary midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 3 9 1 Thick stucco floor and floor fill, secondary midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 3 9 1 Thick stucco floor and floor fill, secon dary midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 3 9 1 Thick stucco floor and floor fill, secondary midden 1 Pachychilus glaphyrus MSJ 2A 3 9 1 Thick stucco floor and floor fill, secondary midden 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 2A 3 9 1 Thick stucco floor and floor fil l, secondary midden 1 Testudines MSJ 2A 4 1 1 Humus above collapsed Structure 2A 1 Tayassuidae MSJ 2A 4 2 1 Collapse above plaza and interior floor 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 4 2 1 Collapse above plaza and interior floor 1 Pachychilus indiorum MSJ 2A 40 3 1 Midden 2 Conch

PAGE 125

125 Table B 3 Continued Provenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 2A 40 3 1 Midden 7 L. Mamm MSJ 2A 40 3 1 Midden 2 Mamm MSJ 2A 40 3 1 Midden 2 Mamm MSJ 2A 40 3 1 Midden 1 Testudines MSJ 2A 40 4 1 Midden 1 M. Mamm MSJ 2A 40 4 1 Midden 1 Mamm MSJ 2A 40 4 1 Midden 1 Marine gastropod MSJ 2A 40 4 1 Midden 2 Testudines MSJ 2A 40 4 1 Midden 2 Testudines MSJ 2A 40 4 1 Midden 1 Unionidae MSJ 2A 40 4 1 Midden 3 Vertebratae MSJ 2A 40 4 1 Midden 6 Vertebratae MSJ 2A 40 4 1 Midden 5 Vertebratae MSJ 2A 40 4 2 Midden 1 Gastropoda MSJ 2A 40 4 2 Midden 5 Gastropoda MSJ 2A 40 4 2 Midden 3 Unionidae MSJ 2A 40 4 3 Midden 1 Canis MSJ 2A 40 4 3 Midden 1 Canis MSJ 2A 40 4 3 Midden 1 Canis MSJ 2A 40 4 3 Midden 1 Carnivora MSJ 2A 40 4 3 Midden 1 Dasypus noveminctus MSJ 2A 40 4 3 Midden 2 Gastropoda MSJ 2A 40 4 3 Midden 7 Gastropoda MSJ 2A 40 4 3 Midden 9 L. Mamm MSJ 2A 40 4 3 Midden 1 Meleagris gallopavo MSJ 2A 40 4 3 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 40 4 3 Midden 1 Odocoileu s virginianus MSJ 2A 40 4 3 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 40 4 3 Midden 1 Pachylus sp. MSJ 2A 40 4 3 Midden 7 Unionidae MSJ 2A 40 4 3 Midden 6 Vertebratae MSJ 2A 40 4 3 Midden 2 Vertebratae MSJ 2A 40 4 4 Midden 1 Carnivora MSJ 2A 40 4 4 Mid den 1 Dasypus noveminctus MSJ 2A 40 4 4 Midden 1 M. Mamm MSJ 2A 40 4 4 Midden 3 M. Mamm MSJ 2A 40 4 4 Midden 2 Mamm MSJ 2A 40 4 4 Midden 4 Mamm MSJ 2A 40 4 4 Midden 1 Marine gastropod MSJ 2A 40 4 4 Midden 4 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 2A 40 5 1 Midden 2 Mamm MSJ 2A 40 5 1 Midden 1 Vertebratae MSJ 2A 40 5 1 Midden 1 Vertebratae MSJ 2A 40 5 2 Midden 1 Cervidae MSJ 2A 40 5 2 Midden 1 Cervidae MSJ 2A 40 5 2 Midden 1 L. Mamm MSJ 2A 40 5 2 Midden 5 L. Mamm MSJ 2A 40 5 2 Midden 4 M. Mamm MSJ 2A 40 5 2 Mi dden 1 M. Mamm MSJ 2A 40 5 2 Midden 22 M. Mamm MSJ 2A 40 5 2 Midden 1 M. Mamm MSJ 2A 40 5 2 Midden 1 M. Mamm MSJ 2A 40 5 2 Midden 4 Mamm MSJ 2A 40 5 2 Midden 13 Mamm

PAGE 126

126 Table B 3 Continued Provenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 2A 40 5 2 Mi dden 1 Mamm MSJ 2A 40 5 2 Midden 1 Mamm MSJ 2A 40 5 2 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 40 5 2 Midden 2 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 40 5 2 Midden 3 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 40 5 2 Midden 3 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 40 5 2 Midden 4 Pom acea flagellata MSJ 2A 40 5 2 Midden 1 Testudines MSJ 2A 40 5 2 Midden 1 Vertebratae MSJ 2A 40 5 2 Midden 1 MSJ 2A 40 5 21 Midden 3 Mamm MSJ 2A 40 5 4 Midden 18 L. Mamm MSJ 2A 40 5 4 Midden 7 Mamm MSJ 2A 40 5 4 Midden 1 Mamm MSJ 2A 40 5 4 Midden 2 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 40 5 4 Midden 1 Pachylus sp. MSJ 2A 40 5 4 Midden 1 Passiformes MSJ 2A 40 5 4 Midden 1 Passiformes MSJ 2A 40 5 4 Midden 1 Passiformes MSJ 2A 40 5 4 Midden 1 Unionidae MSJ 2A 40 5 5 Midden 1 Cervidae MSJ 2A 40 5 5 Midde n 4 L. Mamm MSJ 2A 40 5 5 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 40 5 5 Midden 3 S. Mamm MSJ 2A 41 2 1 Midden 2 Mamm MSJ 2A 41 2 1 Midden 2 Testudines MSJ 2A 41 3 1 Midden 3 L. Mamm MSJ 2A 41 3 1 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 41 3 1 Midden 1 Tapiris rouline MSJ 2A 41 3 1 Midden 1 Tapiris rouline MSJ 2A 41 3 2 Midden 2 S. Mamm MSJ 2A 41 3 2 Midden 2 Testudines MSJ 2A 42 1 1 Plaza II 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 2A 42 3 2 Plaza II 2 Mamm MSJ 2A 42 3 2 Plaza II 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2 A 42 3 2 Plaza II 2 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 1 Canis familiaris MSJ 2A 5 1 Canis familiaris MSJ 2A 5 1 Gastropoda, marine MSJ 2A 5 1 Mammalia MSJ 2A 5 19 Mammalia MSJ 2A 5 1 Mammalia MSJ 2A 5 1 Mammalia MSJ 2A 5 1 Mammalia MSJ 2A 5 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 2A 5 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 2A 5 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 1 Mazama americana MSJ 2A 5 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 1 Odocoileus virginianu s MSJ 2A 5 1 Odocoileus virginianus

PAGE 127

127 Table B 3 Continued Provenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 2A 5 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 2A 5 1 3 Humus with piedrine 1 Canis familiaris MSJ 2A 5 1 3 Humus with piedrine 1 Canis familiaris small MSJ 2A 5 1 3 Humus with piedrine 1 Mammalia MSJ 2A 5 1 3 Humus with piedrine 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 2A 5 1 3 Humus with piedrine 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 2A 5 1 3 Humus with piedrine 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 1 3 Humus with piedrine 1 Mammalia, larg e MSJ 2A 5 1 3 Humus with piedrine 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 1 3 Humus with piedrine 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 1/2 Humus 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 1/2 Humus 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 2 1 Felis concolor MSJ 2A 5 2 1 Mi dden (above Floor C?) 1 Canis familiaris MSJ 2A 5 2 1 Midden (above Floor C?) 1 Canis familiaris MSJ 2A 5 2 1 Midden (above Floor C?) 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 2A 5 2 1 Midden (above Floor C?) 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 3 1 Floor fill 1 Canis familiaris MSJ 2A 5 3 1 Floor fill 1 Canis familiaris MSJ 2A 5 3 1 Floor fill 1 Canis familiaris MSJ 2A 5 3 1 Floor fill 1 Carnivora MSJ 2A 5 3 1 Floor fill 1 Cervidae MSJ 2A 5 3 1 Floor fill 2 Cervidae MSJ 2A 5 3 1 Floor fill 1 Cervidae MSJ 2A 5 3 1 Floor fill 1 Cervidae MSJ 2A 5 3 1 Floor fill 2 Cervidae MSJ 2A 5 3 1 Floor fill 9 Class unknown MSJ 2A 5 3 1 Floor fill 1 idable MSJ 2A 5 3 1 Floor fill 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 2A 5 3 1 Floor fill 25 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 2A 5 3 1 Floor fill 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 2A 5 3 1 Floor fill 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 2A 5 3 1 Floor fill 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 2A 5 3 1 Floor fill 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 2A 5 3 1 Floor fill 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 2A 5 3 1 Floor fill 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 2A 5 3 1 Floor fill 10 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 2A 5 3 1 Floor fill 2 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 3 1 Floor fill 3 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 3 1 Floor fill 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 3 1 Floor fill 5 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 3 1 Floor fill 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 3 1 Floor fill 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 3 1 Floor fill 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 3 1 Floor fill 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 3 1 Floor fill 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 3 1 Floor fill 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 3 1 Floor fill 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 3 1 (Bevin) Floor fill 1 Felidae MSJ 2A 5 3 1 (Bevin) Floor fill 1 Felis pardalis MSJ 2A 5 3 1 (Bevin) Floor fill 1 Odocoileus virginianus

PAGE 128

128 Table B 3 Contin ued Provenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 2A 5 3 1 (Bevin) Floor fill 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 3 1 (Bevin) Floor fill 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 3 2 Fill with midden between Floors B and C 1 Canidae MSJ 2A 5 3 2 Fill with mid den between Floors B and C 1 Canis familiaris MSJ 2A 5 3 2 Fill with midden between Floors B and C 1 Canis familiaris MSJ 2A 5 3 2 Fill with midden between Floors B and C 1 Canis familiaris MSJ 2A 5 3 2 Fill with midden between Floors B and C 1 Canis fa miliaris MSJ 2A 5 3 2 Fill with midden between Floors B and C 1 Canis familiaris MSJ 2A 5 3 2 Fill with midden between Floors B and C 1 Canis familiaris MSJ 2A 5 3 2 Fill with midden between Floors B and C 1 Canis familiaris MSJ 2A 5 3 2 Fill with midd en between Floors B and C 1 Cervidae MSJ 2A 5 3 2 Fill with midden between Floors B and C 1 Homo sapiens MSJ 2A 5 3 2 Fill with midden between Floors B and C 1 Homo sapiens MSJ 2A 5 3 2 Fill with midden between Floors B and C 1 Homo sapiens MSJ 2A 5 3 2 Fill with midden between Floors B and C 1 Homo sapiens MSJ 2A 5 3 2 Fill with midden between Floors B and C 1 Homo sapiens MSJ 2A 5 3 2 Fill with midden between Floors B and C 45 Mammalia MSJ 2A 5 3 2 Fill with midden between Floors B and C 1 Mammalia intermediate MSJ 2A 5 3 2 Fill with midden between Floors B and C 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 2A 5 3 2 Fill with midden between Floors B and C 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 3 2 Fill with midden between Floors B and C 1 Mazama americana MSJ 2A 5 3 2 Fil l with midden between Floors B and C 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 3 2 Fill with midden between Floors B and C 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 3 2 Fill with midden between Floors B and C 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 3 2 Fill with midden betwe en Floors B and C 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 3 2 Fill with midden between Floors B and C 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 3 2 Fill with midden between Floors B and C 1 Odocoileus virginianus

PAGE 129

129 Table B 3 Continued Provenience Context info NISP Id entification MSJ 2A 5 3 2 Fill with midden between Floors B and C 2 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 3 2 Fill with midden between Floors B and C 1 Testudines MSJ 2A 5 4 1 Floor C, stucco and piedrine 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 2A 5 4 1 Floor C, stucco and piedrine 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 2A 5 4 1 Floor C, stucco and piedrine 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 4 1 Floor C, stucco and piedrine 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 4 1 Floor C, stucco and piedrine 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 5 1 Mammalia MS J 2A 5 5 1 Fill with midden under Floor C 1 Class unknown MSJ 2A 5 5 1 Fill with midden under Floor C 1 Dermatemys mawii MSJ 2A 5 5 1 Fill with midden under Floor C 6 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 5 1 Fill with midden under Floor C 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 5 1 Fill with midden under Floor C 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 5 1 Fill with midden under Floor C 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 5 1 Fill with midden under Floor C 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 5 1 Fill with midden under Floor C 1 Urcyon cineoargenteus MSJ 2A 5 5 2 Breccia of stucco, piedrine and ceramics 1 Mammalia MSJ 2A 5 5 2 Breccia of stucco, piedrine and ceramics 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 5 2 Breccia of stucco, piedrine and ceramics 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 5 2 Brecc ia of stucco, piedrine and ceramics 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 2A 5 5 3 Fill with midden under Floor C 1 Canis familiaris MSJ 2A 5 5 3 Fill with midden under Floor C 1 Kinosternidae MSJ 2A 5 5 3 Fill with midden under Floor C 1 Mammalia MSJ 2A 5 5 3 Fill wi th midden under Floor C 1 Mammalia MSJ 2A 5 5 3 Fill with midden under Floor C 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 5 3 Fill with midden under Floor C 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 5 3 Fill with midden under Floor C 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 5 3 Fill with midden u nder Floor C 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 5 3 Fill with midden under Floor C 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 5 3 Fill with midden under Floor C 1 Mollusca, marine MSJ 2A 5 5 3 Fill with midden under Floor C 1 Muridae/Heteromyidae MSJ 2A 5 5 3 Fill with midden under Floor C 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 5 3 Fill with midden under Floor C 1 Phasianidae MSJ 2A 5 5 3 Fill with midden under Floor C 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 2A 5 5 3 Fill with midden under Floor C 1 Sylvilagus sp. MSJ 2A 5 5 3 Fill with midden un der Floor C 1 Sylvilagus sp. MSJ 2A 5 5 4 Fill under 5 5 2 1 Tayassuidae MSJ 2A 5 5 5 Floor D, solid breccias / piedrine 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 2A 5 6 1 Fill with midden 1 Didelphis sp. MSJ 2A 5 6 1 Fill with midden 1 Didelphis sp. MSJ 2A 5 6 1 Fi ll with midden 2 Mammalia MSJ 2A 5 6 1 Fill with midden 1 Mammalia MSJ 2A 5 6 1 Fill with midden 1 Mammalia MSJ 2A 5 6 1 Fill with midden 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 6 1 Fill with midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 1 Fill with midden 1 Sylvilag us floridanus MSJ 2A 5 6 1 Fill with midden 1 Trachemys scripta

PAGE 130

130 Table B 3 Continued Provenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 2A 5 6 1, heavy #91 Fill with midden 2 Mammalia MSJ 2A 5 6 10 Midden, below the burial 1 Meleagrididae MSJ 2A 5 6 10 Midden, below the burial 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 11 Midden, below the burial 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 11 Midden, below the burial 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 12 Midden, below the burial 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 12 Midden, below the burial 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 2A 5 6 13 Midden, below the burial 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 13 Midden, below the burial 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 14 Midden 1 Canidae MSJ 2A 5 6 14 Midden 1 Emydidae MSJ 2A 5 6 14 Midden 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 2A 5 6 14 Midden 6 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 6 14 Midden 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 6 14 Midden 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 6 14 Midden 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 6 14 Midden 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 6 14 Midd en 12 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 6 14 Midden 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 6 14 Midden 1 Mazama americana MSJ 2A 5 6 14 Midden 1 Mazama americana MSJ 2A 5 6 14 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 14 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 14 Mid den 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 14 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 14 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 14 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 14 Midden 1 Oliva sayana MSJ 2A 5 6 14 Midden 1 Pachychilus glaphyrus MS J 2A 5 6 14 Midden 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 2A 5 6 14 Midden 1 Testudines MSJ 2A 5 6 15 Midden 1 Crocodylus sp. MSJ 2A 5 6 15 Midden 1 Dasyprocta punctata MSJ 2A 5 6 15 Midden 2 Emydidae MSJ 2A 5 6 15 Midden 1 Mammalia MSJ 2A 5 6 15 Midden 1 Mammalia, in termediate MSJ 2A 5 6 15 Midden 1 Mammalia, intermediate/large MSJ 2A 5 6 15 Midden 14 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 6 15 Midden 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 6 15 Midden 4 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 6 15 Midden 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 6 15 Midden 1 Mammali a, large MSJ 2A 5 6 15 Midden 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 6 15 Midden 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 6 15 Midden 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 6 15 Midden 5 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 6 15 Midden 8 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 6 15 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 15 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 15 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 15 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 15 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 15 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus

PAGE 131

131 Table B 3 Continue d Provenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 2A 5 6 15 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 15 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 15 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 15 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 15 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 15 Midden 1 Panthera onca MSJ 2A 5 6 15 Midden 1 Sylvilagus floridanus MSJ 2A 5 6 15 Midden 1 Sylvilagus floridanus MSJ 2A 5 6 15 Midden 1 Tayassuidae MSJ 2A 5 6 15 Midden 1 Testudines, small, pitted MSJ 2A 5 6 15 Midden 1 Trachemys scripta MSJ 2A 5 6 15 Midden 48 Vertebrata MSJ 2A 5 6 16 Midden 82 Dermatemys mawii MSJ 2A 5 6 16 Midden 1 Emydidae MSJ 2A 5 6 16 Midden 1 Gastropoda, marine MSJ 2A 5 6 16 Midden 1 Mammalia MSJ 2A 5 6 16 Midden 4 Mammalia, interme diate MSJ 2A 5 6 16 Midden 5 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 2A 5 6 16 Midden 32 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 2A 5 6 16 Midden 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 6 16 Midden 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 6 16 Midden 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 6 16 Midden 1 Mammalia, l arge MSJ 2A 5 6 16 Midden 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 6 16 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 16 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 16 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 16 Midden 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 2A 5 6 16 Midden 1 Psorona ias sp. MSJ 2A 5 6 16 Midden 1 Sauria MSJ 2A 5 6 16 Midden 1 Sylvilagus floridanus MSJ 2A 5 6 16 Midden 1 Sylvilagus floridanus MSJ 2A 5 6 16 Midden 1 Testudines MSJ 2A 5 6 16 Midden 1 Trachemys scripta MSJ 2A 5 6 17 Midden 2 Aves, small MSJ 2A 5 6 17 Midden 1 Didelphis virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 17 Midden 1 Didelphis virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 17 Midden 2 Didelphis virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 17 Midden 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 6 17 Midden 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 6 17 Midden 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 6 17 Midden 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 6 17 Midden 2 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 6 17 Midden 13 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 6 17 Midden 20 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 6 17 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 17 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 17 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 17 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 17 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 17 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 17 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 17 Midden 1 Odocoil eus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 17 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus

PAGE 132

132 Table B 3 Continued Provenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 2A 5 6 17 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 17 Midden 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 2A 5 6 17 Midden 1 Trachemys s cripta MSJ 2A 5 6 17 Midden 1 Vertebrata MSJ 2A 5 6 18 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 6 18 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 6 18 1 Mollusca MSJ 2A 5 6 18 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 18 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 18 1 Odocoileus virginia nus MSJ 2A 5 6 18 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 18 1 Tayassidae MSJ 2A 5 6 2 Midden 1 Agouti paca MSJ 2A 5 6 2 Midden 1 Aves, intermediate/large MSJ 2A 5 6 2 Midden 8 Class unknown MSJ 2A 5 6 2 Midden 31 Class unknown MSJ 2A 5 6 2 Midden 1 H omo sapiens MSJ 2A 5 6 2 Midden 1 Invertebrata MSJ 2A 5 6 2 Midden 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 2A 5 6 2 Midden 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 2A 5 6 2 Midden 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 6 2 Midden 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 6 2 Midden 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 6 2 Midden 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 6 2 Midden 1 Mammalia, small MSJ 2A 5 6 2 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 2 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 2 Midden 1 Rodentia, small MSJ 2A 5 6 2 Midden 1 Strombidae MSJ 2A 5 6 2 Midden 1 Strombidae MSJ 2A 5 6 2 Midden 1 Sylvilagus floridanus MSJ 2A 5 6 2 Midden 1 Testudines, pitted, small MSJ 2A 5 6 2 Midden 1 Vertebrata MSJ 2A 5 6 3 Burial #3 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 3 Burial #3 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 3, heavy #64 Burial #3 1 Aves MSJ 2A 5 6 3, heavy #64 Burial #3 38 Mammalia MSJ 2A 5 6 3, heavy #64 Burial #3 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 2A 5 6 3, heavy #64 Burial #3 1 Mammalia, large/intermediate MSJ 2A 5 6 3, heavy #64 Burial #3 1 Testudines MSJ 2A 5 6 3, heavy #64 Burial #3 200 Vertebrata MSJ 2A 5 6 4 Midden 1 Canis familiaris MSJ 2A 5 6 4 Midden 1 Class unknown MSJ 2A 5 6 4 Midden 1 Class unknown MSJ 2A 5 6 4 Midden 1 Dermatemys mawii MSJ 2A 5 6 4 Midden 2 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 6 4 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 4 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus

PAGE 133

133 Table B 3 Continued Provenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 2A 5 6 4 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 4 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 4 Midd en 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 4 Midden 1 Testudines MSJ 2A 5 6 4 Midden 1 Testudines, pitted MSJ 2A 5 6 5 Midden 1 Emydidae MSJ 2A 5 6 5 Midden 1 Mammalia MSJ 2A 5 6 5 Midden 3 Mammalia MSJ 2A 5 6 5 Midden 2 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 6 5 Mid den 1 Mammalia, large/intermediate MSJ 2A 5 6 5 Midden 3 Mammalia, small/intermediate MSJ 2A 5 6 6 Midden 1 Canis familiaris MSJ 2A 5 6 6 Midden 4 Mammalia MSJ 2A 5 6 6 Midden 9 Mammalia MSJ 2A 5 6 6 Midden 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 2A 5 6 6 Midde n 1 Mollusca, marine MSJ 2A 5 6 6 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 6 Midden 1 Panthera onca MSJ 2A 5 6 6 Midden 1 Testudines, pitted MSJ 2A 5 6 6 Midden 1 Testudines, pitted, small MSJ 2A 5 6 7 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 8 M idden 1 Canidae MSJ 2A 5 6 8 Midden 1 Canis familiaris MSJ 2A 5 6 8 Midden 1 Cervidae MSJ 2A 5 6 8 Midden 1 Mammalia MSJ 2A 5 6 8 Midden 1 Mammalia MSJ 2A 5 6 8 Midden 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 6 8 Midden 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2A 5 6 8 Midden 3 Mam malia, large MSJ 2A 5 6 8 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 6 8 Midden 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 2A 5 6 9 Midden 1 Aves, intermediate MSJ 2A 5 7 1 Mammalia MSJ 2A 5 7 2 Midden 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 2A 5 7 2 Midden 1 Mazama americana MS J 2A 5 7 2 Midden 1 Mazama americana MSJ 2A 5 7 2 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 7 2 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 7 2 Midden 1 Tayassidae MSJ 2A 5 7 3 Midden, above bedrock 1 Homo sapiens MSJ 2A 5 7 3 Midden, above bedrock 1 Mamm alia MSJ 2A 5 7 3 Midden, above bedrock 1 Mammalia MSJ 2A 5 7 3 Midden, above bedrock 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2A 5 7 3 Midden, above bedrock 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 2A 7 2 1 Structure wall fall 1 Gastropoda, marine MSJ 2A 7 2 1 Structure wall fall 1 Mammalia MSJ 2A 7 2 1 Structure wall fall 1 Mollusca, marine MSJ 2A 7 2 2 1 Mazama americana MSJ 2A 9 2 1 Wall fall over bench 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 2A 9 2 1 Wall fall over bench 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2B 1 1 1 Humus over midden 1 Mamma lia, large MSJ 2B 1 1 1 Humus over midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2B 1 1 1 Humus over midden 1 Reptilia MSJ 2B 1 4 1 Midden 2 Aves, large

PAGE 134

134 Table B 3 Continued Provenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 2B 1 4 1 Midden 1 Mammalia MSJ 2B 1 4 1 Midden 2 Mammalia MSJ 2B 1 4 1 Midden 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2B 1 4 1 Midden 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2B 1 4 1 Midden 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2B 1 4 1 Midden 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2B 1 4 1 Midden 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 2B 1 4 1 Midden 1 Sauria M SJ 2B 1 5 1 Midden over piedrine rear plaza floor and floor fill below 1 Didelphis sp. MSJ 2B 1 5 1 Midden over piedrine rear plaza floor and floor fill below 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2B 1 5 1 Midden over piedrine rear plaza floor and floor fill below 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 2B 1 5 1 Midden over piedrine rear plaza floor and floor fill below 3 Mammalia, large MSJ 2B 1 5 1 Midden over piedrine rear plaza floor and floor fill below 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2B 1 6 1 Fill below rear plaza floor 1 Agout i paca MSJ 2B 1 6 1 Fill below rear plaza floor 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 2B 1 6 1 Fill below rear plaza floor 1 Strombidae MSJ 2B 1 7 1 Fill below rear plaza floor 1 Cervidae MSJ 2B 1 7 1 Fill below rear plaza floor 1 Mammalia MSJ 2B 1 7 1 Fill b elow rear plaza floor 1 Mammalia MSJ 2B 1 7 1 Fill below rear plaza floor 5 Mammalia MSJ 2B 1 7 1 Fill below rear plaza floor 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 2B 1 7 1 Fill below rear plaza floor 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 2B 1 7 1 Fill below rear plaza flo or 1 Rodentia, small MSJ 2B 1s 1 Mammalia MSJ 2B 1s 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 30A 16 1 1 humus, black earth 1 Mazama americana MSJ 30A 16 2 3 humus, big and medium rocks 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 30A 16 2 3 humus, big and medium rocks 1 Pachychilus indiorum MSJ 30C 1 1, heavy #134 humus 2 Mammalia MSJ 30D 1 3 6 limestone 1 Dermatemys/Staurotypus MSJ 30D 1 3 6 limestone 1 Dermatemys/Staurotypus MSJ 30D 1 3 6 limestone 1 Dermatemys/Staurotypus MSJ 30D 1 3 6 limestone 1 Dermatemys/Staurotypus MSJ 30D 1 3 6 limestone 1 Emydidae MSJ 30D 1 3 6 limestone 1 Emydidae MSJ 30D 1 3 6 limestone 1 Mammalia MSJ 30D 1 3 6 limestone 1 Pachychilus glaphyrus MSJ 30D 1 3 6 limestone 2 Testudines MSJ 30D 1 3 6 limestone 4 Testudines MSJ 30D 1 3 6 limestone 3 Vertebrat a MSJ 30D 16 1 1 1 Mazama americana MSJ 31A 1 1 1 recent fire 1 Mollusca MSJ 31A 4 3 1 1 Mammalia, small MSJ 31A 5 2 1 midden, clay 1 Mollusca, marine

PAGE 135

135 Table B 3 Continued Provenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 31A 5 2 1 midden, clay 1 P achychilus indiorum MSJ 31A 5 3 1 bedrock and humus 1 Pelecypoda MSJ 31A 7 2 3 stucco mixed in 1 Aves MSJ 31A 7 2 5 collapse/floor 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 31A 7 2 5 collapse/floor 3 Mammalia, large MSJ 31A looters Back Fill A 1 Testudines MSJ 31H 1 1 1 on S mound of 'dwarf ballcourt', looking at edge of structure 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 31H 1 1 3 1 Dermatemys mawii MSJ 31H 1 1 3 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 32A 14 1 3 medium and small rocks 1 Pachychilus indiorum MSJ 32B 2 1 1 humus 1 Mammalia, larg e/intermediate MSJ 32B 22 1 1 humus 2 Mammalia MSJ 32B 22 1 1 humus 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 32B 22 1 1 humus 3 Mammalia, large MSJ 32B 22 1 1 humus 1 Mammalia, large/intermediate MSJ 32B 22 2 2 fill 2 Canis familiaris MSJ 32B 22 2 2 fill 5 Mammalia, in termediate MSJ 32B 22 2 2 fill 1 Mammalia, large/intermediate MSJ 32B 22 2 2 fill 1 Sylvilagus sp. MSJ 32B 5 1 1 humus 1 Mammalia, large/intermediate MSJ 32D 1 1 3 rocks, limestone 2 Staurotypus triporcatus MSJ 32D 1 1 3 rocks, limestone 1 Testudines MSJ 32D 1 1 3 rocks, limestone 1 Testudines MSJ 32D 1 1 3 rocks, limestone 2 Testudines MSJ 33B 10 2 3 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 33B 16 1 1 humus, medium and small rocks 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 33B 16 1 2 humus, medium and small rocks 1 Mammalia, in termediate MSJ 33B 6 1 1 humus, small rocks 1 Cervidae MSJ 33C 8 1 1 humus, limestone 1 Mammalia, large/intermediate MSJ 33D 12 2 2 medium and small rocks 1 Mammalia, large/intermediate MSJ 34A 11 1 1 humus 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 34A 11 2 2 humus 1 Mam malia MSJ 34A 11 3 3 1 Kinosternidae, small MSJ 34A 11 3 3 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 34A 11 4 4 7 Homo sapiens

PAGE 136

136 Table B 3 Continued Provenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 34A 11 4 4 6 Mammalia, large MSJ 34A 11 5 5 through plaza floor 1 Dermatemys mawii MSJ 34A 11 5 5 through plaza floor 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 34A 11 6 6 continuing below basurero 2nd floor 5 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 34A 11 6 6 continuing below basurero 2nd floor 2 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 34A 11 6 6 continuing bel ow basurero 2nd floor 2 Mammalia, large MSJ 34A 11 6 6 continuing below basurero 2nd floor 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 34A 11 6 6 continuing below basurero 2nd floor 2 Mammalia, large MSJ 34A 11 6 6 continuing below basurero 2nd floor 7 Mammalia, large MSJ 3 4A 11 6 6 continuing below basurero 2nd floor 13 Mammalia, large/intermediate MSJ 34A 11 6 6 continuing below basurero 2nd floor 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 34A 11 6 6 continuing below basurero 2nd floor 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 34A 11 7 7 continuing b elow basurero and plaza floor 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 34A 11 7 7 continuing below basurero and plaza floor 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 34A 11 7 7 continuing below basurero and plaza floor 3 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 34A 4 2 2 tierra con piectos? de varios tomanos 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 34A 6 2 2 relleno, piedras medianas y pequeas 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 34A 8 1 1 humus con raices 1 Didelphidae MSJ 34B 10 1 2 tierra negro, races al final hay piedras pequeos y material arqueolgica probablemente de relleno 7 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 35A 5 1 1 humus, sm rock 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 35A 5 1 1 humus, sm rock 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 35D 2 1 1 humus 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 35D 3 1 2 humus 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 35E 4 1 1 loose, dark, humus 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 3 5H 4 3 5 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 35I 3 1 1 down 10 cm, on platform on SE corner of STR. 1 1 Dermatemys mawii MSJ 35l 3 2 2 down another 10 cm below wall fall 1 Dermatemys mawii MSJ 35l 3 2 2 down another 10 cm below wall fall 1 Dermatemys mawii MSJ 37A 5 1 1 down 20cm 1 Cricetidae MSJ 37B 3 1 1 through humus and collapse to level of rocks in step 1 Didelphidae MSJ 37B 3 1 1 through humus and collapse to level of rocks in step 1 Didelphidae MSJ 37B 3 1 1 through humus and collapse to level of rocks in s tep 1 Didelphidae

PAGE 137

137 Table B 3 Continued Provenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 37B 3 1 1 through humus and collapse to level of rocks in step 1 Emydidae MSJ 37B 3 1 1 through humus and collapse to level of rocks in step 1 Gastropoda MSJ 37B 3 1 1 through humus and collapse to level of rocks in step 2 Geomyidae MSJ 37B 3 1 1 through humus and collapse to level of rocks in step 1 Mammalia MSJ 37B 3 1 1 through humus and collapse to level of rocks in step 1 Mollusca MSJ 37B 3 1 1 through humus and collapse to level of rocks in step 1 Orthogeomys hispidus MSJ 37B 3 1 1 through humus and collapse to level of rocks in step 1 Rodentia MSJ 37B 3 1 1 through humus and collapse to level of rocks in step 3 Serpentes MSJ 37B 3 1 1 through humus and c ollapse to level of rocks in step 1 Tamandua mexicana MSJ 37B 3 1 1 through humus and collapse to level of rocks in step 1 Tamandua mexicana MSJ 37B 3 1 1 through humus and collapse to level of rocks in step 1 Tamandua mexicana MSJ 37B 3 1 1 through hum us and collapse to level of rocks in step 1 Tamandua mexicana MSJ 37B 3 1 1 through humus and collapse to level of rocks in step 1 Tamandua mexicana MSJ 37B 3 1 1 through humus and collapse to level of rocks in step 1 Testudines MSJ 37B 3 1 1 through hu mus and collapse to level of rocks in step 1 Trachemys scripta MSJ 37B 3 1 1 through humus and collapse to level of rocks in step 1 Trachemys scripta MSJ 37B 3 1 1 through humus and collapse to level of rocks in step 5 Trachemys scripta MSJ 37B 3 1 1 th rough humus and collapse to level of rocks in step 4 Trachemys scripta MSJ 37B 3 1 1 through humus and collapse to level of rocks in step 5 Trachemys scripta MSJ 37B 3 1 1 through humus and collapse to level of rocks in step 1 Trachemys scripta MSJ 37B 3 1 1 through humus and collapse to level of rocks in step 1 Trachemys scripta MSJ 37B 3 1 1 through humus and collapse to level of rocks in step 1 Trachemys scripta MSJ 37B 3 1 1 through humus and collapse to level of rocks in step 1 Trachemys scripta MSJ 37B 3 1 1 through humus and collapse to level of rocks in step 1 Trachemys scripta MSJ 37B 3 1 1 through humus and collapse to level of rocks in step 1 Trachemys scripta MSJ 37B 3 1 1 through humus and collapse to level of rocks in step 9 Trachemys s cripta MSJ 37B 3 1 1 through humus and collapse to level of rocks in step 1 Trachemys scripta

PAGE 138

138 Table B 3 Continued Provenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 37B 3 1 1 through humus and collapse to level of rocks in step 1 Trachemys scripta MSJ 37B 3 1 1 through humus and collapse to level of rocks in step 1 Trachemys scripta MSJ 37B 3 1 1 through humus and collapse to level of rocks in step 7 Vertebrata MSJ 37B 5 1 1 down 20 cm in E half unit 2 Mammalia, small MSJ 37B 5 1 1 down 20 cm in E ha lf unit 2 Mammalia, small MSJ 37B 5 1 1 down 20 cm in E half unit 1 Mammalia, small MSJ 37B 5 1 1 down 20 cm in E half unit 1 Rodentia MSJ 37B 5 1 1 down 20 cm in E half unit 1 Sciuridae MSJ 37B 5 1 1 down 20 cm in E half unit 1 Serpentes MSJ 37B 5 1 1 down 20 cm in E half unit 1 Viperidae MSJ 39C 2 2 1 27 Mammalia, large MSJ 39C 2 3 2 3 Mammalia, large MSJ 39C 2 3 2 5 Mammalia, large MSJ 39C 2 3 2 20 Mammalia, large MSJ 39C 2 3 2 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 39C 2 3 2 1 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 3A 3 15 1 1 Dermatemys mawii MSJ 41B 1 2 2 sm rock fill 1 Mammalia, intermediate MSJ 42A 1 1 1 Humus 2 Dermatemys mawii MSJ 42A 1 1 1 Humus 4 Mammalia MSJ 42D 7 2 3 Continuation of lot 2 1 Canis familiaris MSJ 42D 7 2 3 Continuation of lot 2 1 Mammalia, large/intermediate MSJ 42D 7 2 3 Continuation of lot 2 2 Mammalia, small MSJ 42D 8 3 6 Lot under lot 5, continuation of brown fill level (3) 1 Dermatemys mawii MSJ 42D 8 3 6 Lot under lot 5, continuation of brown fill level (3) 1 Dermatemys mawii MSJ 42D 8 3 6 Lot under lot 5, continuation of brown fill level (3) 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 42D 8 3 6 Lot under lot 5, continuation of brown fill level (3) 3 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 42E 10 1 2 1 Testudines MSJ 42E 11A 1 1 11 Mammalia, large MSJ 42E 11A 1 1 4 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 43D 9 1 1 Lot consists of dark humus soil with artifact inclusions 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 43F 7 1 1 Dark humus soil with pebble inclusions 6 Mammalia MSJ 44E 2 1 2 possible midden indicated by phosphate test, humus, fil l 1 Gastropoda MSJ 44G 1 3 3 sm hard and limestone rock 1 Mammalia MSJ 44G 1 3 4 sm hard and limestone rock over bedrock 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 44G 2 2 3 1 Mammalia MSJ 44G 2 2 3 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 44H 2 1 2 humus 2 Mammalia, large MSJ 44H 2 1 3 humus over rock fill 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 44I 1 1 2 humus 3 Mammalia, large/intermediate MSJ 44I 1 2 3 rock fill 1 Gastropoda, marine

PAGE 139

139 Table B 3 Continued Provenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 44I 1 2 3 rock fill 2 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 44I 1 3 4 fill 2 Psoronaias sp. MSJ 44I 1 3 6 fill above bedrock 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 44J 1 2 2 sm and med rock, some lg limestone rock, fill 3 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 44J 1 4 7 rock, fill 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 44J 1 5 8 fill 1 Gastropoda, marine MSJ 44J 1 5 8 fill 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 46A 1 2 3 Plaza II 2 L. Mamm MSJ 46A 1 2 3 Plaza II 1 L. Mamm MSJ 46A 1 2 3 Plaza II 2 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 46A 1 2 4 Plaza II 1 Aves MSJ 46A 1 2 4 Plaza II 2 Gastropoda MSJ 46A 1 2 4 Plaza II 4 L. Mamm MSJ 46A 1 2 4 Plaza II 2 Mamm MSJ 46A 1 2 4 Plaza II 1 small carnivore MSJ 46A 1 4 1 Plaza II 1 Gastropoda MSJ 46A 1 4 1 Plaza II 1 L. Mamm MSJ 46A 1 4 1 Plaza II 6 Mamm MSJ 46A 1 4 1 Plaza II 1 Mamm MSJ 46A 1 4 1 Plaza II 1 Odocoileus vi rginianus MSJ 46A 1 4 1 Plaza II 1 S. Mamm MSJ 46A 1 4 1 Plaza II 1 Sylvilagus sp. MSJ 46A 10 2 1 Plaza II 1 ? MSJ 46A 10 2 1 Plaza II 2 Gastropoda MSJ 46A 10 2 1 Plaza II 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 46A 11 2 1 Plaza II 1 Helicinia amonea MSJ 46A 1 1 2 1 Plaza II 2 Mamm MSJ 46A 11 2 1 Plaza II 1 Orthalicus princeops MSJ 46A 2 2 1 Plaza II 2 Gastropoda MSJ 46A 2 2 2 Plaza II 1 Mamm MSJ 46A 3 1 1 Plaza II 1 Orthalicus princeops MSJ 46A 3 2 1 Plaza II 2 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 46A 3 2 2 Plaza II 1 Gastropoda MSJ 46A 3 2 2 Plaza II 1 Testudines MSJ 46A 4 1 1 Plaza II 2 M. Mamm MSJ 46A 4 2 1 Plaza II 1 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 46A 4 2 2 Plaza II 1 Canis MSJ 46A 4 2 2 Plaza II 3 Canis MSJ 46A 4 2 2 Plaza II 1 Canis MSJ 46A 4 2 2 Plaza II 1 Carnivo ra MSJ 46A 4 2 2 Plaza II 1 Carnivora MSJ 46A 4 2 2 Plaza II 3 Gastropoda MSJ 46A 4 2 2 Plaza II 3 L. Mamm MSJ 46A 4 2 2 Plaza II 5 M. Mamm MSJ 46A 4 2 2 Plaza II 21 Mamm MSJ 46A 4 2 2 Plaza II 1 Mamm MSJ 46A 4 2 2 Plaza II 1 Unionidae

PAGE 140

140 Table B 3 Continued Provenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 46A 4 3 1 Plaza II 1 Cervidae MSJ 46A 4 3 1 Plaza II 1 Cervidae MSJ 46A 4 3 1 Plaza II 1 Cervidae MSJ 46A 4 3 1 Plaza II 7 L. Mamm MSJ 46A 4 3 1 Plaza II 3 L. Mamm MSJ 46A 4 3 1 Plaza II Mam m MSJ 46A 4 3 1 Plaza II 28 Mamm MSJ 46A 4 3 1 Plaza II 3 Mamm MSJ 46A 4 3 1 Plaza II 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 46A 4 3 1 Plaza II 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 46A 4 3 1 Plaza II 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 46A 4 3 1 Plaza II 1 Odocoileus virgini anus MSJ 46A 4 3 1 Plaza II 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 46A 4 3 1 Plaza II 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 46A 4 3 1 Plaza II 2 Testudines MSJ 46A 4 3 2 Plaza II 1 Canis MSJ 46A 4 3 2 Plaza II 1 Canis MSJ 46A 4 3 2 Plaza II 1 Canis MSJ 46A 4 3 2 Plaza II 1 Canis MSJ 46A 4 3 2 Plaza II 2 L. Mamm MSJ 46A 4 3 2 Plaza II 1 M. Mamm MSJ 46A 4 3 2 Plaza II 1 M. Mamm MSJ 46A 4 3 2 Plaza II 5 Mamm MSJ 46A 4 3 2 Plaza II 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 46A 4 3 2 Plaza II 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 46A 4 3 2 Plaza II 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 46A 4 3 2 Plaza II 8 Unionidae MSJ 46A 5 2 1 Plaza II 1 Mamm MSJ 46A 5 2 1 Plaza II 1 Mamm MSJ 46A 5 2 1 Plaza II 3 Pomacea flagellata MSJ 46A 5 2 1 Plaza II 1 shell MSJ 46A 5 2 1 Plaza II 1 Vertebratae MSJ 46 A 6 2 1 Plaza II 1 Mamm MSJ 46A 6 2 3 Plaza II 1 Cervidae MSJ 46A 6 2 3 Plaza II 3 Mamm MSJ 46A 6 2 3 Plaza II 1 ostracod MSJ 46A 6 3 1 Plaza II 10 L. Mamm MSJ 46A 6 3 1 Plaza II 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 46A 6 3 2 Plaza II 1 Odocoileus virginianu s MSJ 46A 8 2 2 Plaza II 5 L. Mamm MSJ 46A 9 2 1 Plaza II 1 Unionidae MSJ 4A 1 3 1 floor fill, lots of piedrine 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 4A 1 3 1 floor fill, lots of piedrine 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 4A 1 3 1 floor fill, lots of piedrine 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 4A 1 3 1 floor fill, lots of piedrine 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 4A 1 3 1 floor fill, lots of piedrine 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 4A 1 4 1 fill, one shell looks as if worked on 1 Oliva sp., small MSJ 7A 1 1 1 humus, possible bone but not well pr eserved 2 Mammalia, large MSJ 7A 1 1 1 humus, possible bone but not well preserved 3 Mammalia, large MSJ 7A 2 2 1 ceramic not well preserved, bone in NW corner, more rock/fill, wet and muddy 1 Cervidae

PAGE 141

141 Table B 3 Continued Provenience Context info NISP Identification MSJ 7A 2 2 1 ceramic not well preserved, bone in NW corner, more rock/fill, wet and muddy 1 Cervidae MSJ 7A 2 2 1 ceramic not well preserved, bone in NW corner, more rock/fill, wet and muddy 1 Cervidae MSJ 7A 2 2 1 ceramic not well prese rved, bone in NW corner, more rock/fill, wet and muddy 1 Cervidae, v. small MSJ 7A 2 2 1 ceramic not well preserved, bone in NW corner, more rock/fill, wet and muddy 3 Class unknown MSJ 7A 2 2 1 ceramic not well preserved, bone in NW corner, more rock/fi ll, wet and muddy 1 Gastropoda, marine MSJ 7A 2 2 1 ceramic not well preserved, bone in NW corner, more rock/fill, wet and muddy 2 Mammalia MSJ 7A 2 2 1 ceramic not well preserved, bone in NW corner, more rock/fill, wet and muddy 1 Mammalia, intermedia te MSJ 7A 2 2 1 ceramic not well preserved, bone in NW corner, more rock/fill, wet and muddy 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 7A 2 2 1 ceramic not well preserved, bone in NW corner, more rock/fill, wet and muddy 5 Mammalia, large MSJ 7A 2 2 1 ceramic not well pres erved, bone in NW corner, more rock/fill, wet and muddy 6 Mammalia, large MSJ 7A 2 2 1 ceramic not well preserved, bone in NW corner, more rock/fill, wet and muddy 1 Mammalia, small MSJ 7A 2 2 1 ceramic not well preserved, bone in NW corner, more rock/fi ll, wet and muddy 1 Mammalia, small MSJ 7A 2 2 1 ceramic not well preserved, bone in NW corner, more rock/fill, wet and muddy 1 Mammalia, very large MSJ 7A 2 2 1 ceramic not well preserved, bone in NW corner, more rock/fill, wet and muddy 1 Odocoileus vi rginianus MSJ 7A 2 2 1 ceramic not well preserved, bone in NW corner, more rock/fill, wet and muddy 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 7A 2 2 1 ceramic not well preserved, bone in NW corner, more rock/fill, wet and muddy 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 7A 2 2 1 ceramic not well preserved, bone in NW corner, more rock/fill, wet and muddy 1 Odocoileus virginianus MSJ 7A 2 2 1 ceramic not well preserved, bone in NW corner, more rock/fill, wet and muddy 1 Odocoileus virginianus

PAGE 142

142 Table B 3 Continued Provenience Con text info NISP Identification MSJ 7A 2 2 1 ceramic not well preserved, bone in NW corner, more rock/fill, wet and muddy 1 Vertebrata MSJ 7A 2 3 1 few ceramics indicative of recent occupation fill doesn't have much stuff from other middens 1 Mammalia, large MSJ 7A 2 3 1 few ceramics indicative of recent occupation fill doesn't have much stuff from other middens 1 Testudines MSJ 8D 15 1 2 humus, sm rock, went down to level of lg rock 1 Canis familiaris MSJ 9C 4 1 1 humus, sm and med rock 1 Mammal ia, large/intermediate

PAGE 143

143 LIST OF REFERENCES Anderson, E. N. 2010 Food and Feasting in the Zona Maya of Quintana Roo. In Pre Columbian Foodways: Interdisciplinary Approaches to Food, Culture, and Markets in Ancient Mesoamerica. J. Staller and M. Carrasco, eds. Chicago: Springer. Anderson, L. 1998 Heliconiaceae. In The Families and Genera of Vascular Plants. K. Kubitzki, ed. Pp. 226 230, Vol. Volume IV: Flowering Plants Monocotyledons (Alismatanae and Commelinanae {except Graminae}). New York: Springer. And rews, E. Wyllys I. 1969 The Archaeological Use and Distribution of Mollusca in the Maya Lowlands, Vol. Publication 34. New Orleans: Middle American Research Institute. Anselmetti, Flavio S., Daniel Ariztequi, David A. Hodell, Michael B. Hillesheim, Mark B renner, A. Gilli, J. A. McKenzie, and Andreas D. Mueller. 2006 Late Quaternary climate induced lake level variations in Lake Petn Itz, Guatemala, inferred from seismic stratigraphic analysis. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 230:52 69. Bair, Daniel A., and Richard E. Terry In Press In Search of Markets and Fields: Soil Chemical Investigations at Motul de San Jos. In Politics, History and Economy in the Classic Maya Polity of Motul de San Jos, Guatemala. A.E. Foias and K.F. Emery, eds. Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida. Beach, Timothy, Sheryl Luzzadder Beach, Nicholas Dunning, John Jones, Jon Lohse, Tom Guderjan, Steven Bozarth, Sarah Millspaugh, and Tripti Bhattacharya 2009 A review of human and natural changes in Maya Low land wetlands over the Holocene. Quaternary Science Reviews: 1 15. Beach, Timothy, Sheryl Luzzadder Beach, Richard E. Terry, Nicholas Dunning, Stephen Houston, and Tomas Garrison 2011 Carbon Isotopic Ratios of Wetland and Terrace Soil Sequences in the May a Lowlands of Belize and Guatemala. Catena 85:109 118.

PAGE 144

144 Bozarth, Steven 1987 Diagnostic opal phytoliths from rinds of selected Cucurbita species. American Antiquity 52:607 615. 1990 Diagnostic opal phytoliths from pods of selected varieties of common beans (Phaseolus vulgaris). American Antiquity 55:98 104. 1992 Classification of Opal Phytoliths Formed in Selected Dicotyledons Native to the Great Plains. In Phytolith Systematics: Emerging Issues. G.J. Rapp and S.C. Mullholland, eds. New York: Plenum Press. Bozarth, Steven, and Thomas H. Guderjan 2004 Biosilicate Analysis of Residue in Maya Dedicatory Cache Vessels from Blue Creek, Belize. Journal for Archaeological Science 31:205 215. Braswell, Geoffrey E. 2010 The Rise and Fall of Market Exchange: A Dynamic Approach to Ancient Maya Economy. In Archaeological Approaches to Market Exchange In Ancient Societies. C.P. Garraty and B.L. Stark, eds. Boulder: University of Colorado Press. Brenner, Mark, Michael F. Rosenmeier, David A. Hodell, and Jason H. Curtis 2002 Paleolimnology of the Maya Lowlands: Long term perspectives on interactions among climate, environment, and humans. Ancient Mesoamerica 13:141 157. Brown, Linda 1996 Household and Village Animal Use at the Ceren Site. In Preliminary Report of the Ceren Research Project 1996 Field Season. P. Sheets and L. Brown, eds. Pp. 32 44. Boulder, CO: Department of Anthropology, University of Colorado. Brown, William T., and Dawn. Strohmeyer 2011 Life and Death at Nojol Nah: An Analysis of the 2010 Assem blage and Synthesis of Three Years of Bioarchaeological Inquiry. In The 19th Annual Report of the Blue Creek Archaeological Project. T.H. Guderjan, ed. Tyler, Texas: University of Texas at Tyler.

PAGE 145

145 Carr, Eathan 1996 Precolumbian Maya Exploitation and Manag ement of Deer Populations. In The Managed Mosaic: Ancient Maya Agriculture and Resource Use. S.L. Fedick, ed. Pp. 251 261. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press. Carr, H. S. 1985 Subsistence and Ceremony: Faunal Utilization in a Late Preclassic Communi ty at Cerros, Belize. In Prehistoric Lowland Maya Environment and Subsistence Economy. M.D. Pohl, ed. Pp. 115 132. Papers of the Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology, Vol. 77. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 1986 Faunal Utilization in a Late Preclassic Maya Community at Cerros, Belize, Tulane University. Chen, C. H., and J. C. Lewin 1969 Silicon as a Nutrient of Equisetum arvense. Canadian Journal of Botany 47:125 131. Christenson, Allen J. 2010 Maize Was Their Flesh: Ritual Feasting in the Maya Highlands. In Pre Columbian Foodways: Interdisciplinary Approaches to Food, Culture, and Markets in Ancient Mesoamerica. J. Staller and M. Carrasco, eds. Chicago : Springer. Curtis, Jason H., Mark Brenner, David A. Hodell, Richard A. Balser, Geral d A. Islebe, and Henry Hooghiemstra 1998 A multi proxy study of Holocene environmental change in the Maya Lowlands of Petn Guatemala. Journal of Paleolimnology 19(2):139 159. D'Altroy, Terence N., and Timothy K. Earle 1985 Staple Finance, Wealth Financ e, and Storage in the Inka Political Economy. Current Anthropology 26(2):187 197. Dahlin, Bruce H., Daniel A. Bair, Timothy Beach, Matthew D. Moriarty, and Richard E. Terry 2009 The Dirt on Food: Ancient Feasts and Markets Among the Lowland Maya. In Pre C olumbian Foodways: Interdisciplinary Approaches to Food, Culture, and Markets in Ancient Mesoamerica. J. Staller and M. Carrasco, eds. New York: Springer.

PAGE 146

146 Dahlin, Bruce H. Christopher T. Jensen, Richard E. Terry, David R. Wright, and Timothy Beach 2007 In Search of an Ancient Maya Market. Latin American Antiquity 18(4):363 384. Dinan, Elizabeth H., and Ralph M. Rowlett 1993 Vegetational Changes at the Shriver Paleo Indian Site, N.W. Missouri: Phytolith Analysis as an Aid in Environmental Reconstruction. I n Current Research in Phytolith Analysis: Applications in Archaeology and Paleoecology. D. Pearsall and D. Piperno, eds. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Emery, K. F. In Press The Motul de San Jose Animals in an Economic Perspective. In Pol itics, History and Economy in the Classic Maya Polity of Motul de San Jos, Guatemala. K.F. Emery and A.E. Foias, eds. Gainesville: University of Florida Press. Emery, K. F., and Antonia E. Foias In Press Landscapes, Economies, and the Politics of Power i n the Motul de San Jos Region. In Politics, History, and Economy at the Classic Maya Polity of Motul de San Jose, Guatemala. A.E. Foias and K.F. Emery, eds. Gainesville: University Press of Florida. Emery, Kitty F. 1998a Investigaciones Ecologicas de 199 8: Ecologa y Medioambiente de Motul de San Jose: Estudios Preliminares y Futoros. In Proyecto Arqueolgico Motul de San Jose Informe #1. A.E. Foias, ed. Pp. 63 75. Guatemala City: Instituto de Antropologia e Historia. 1998b Proyecto Motul de San Jose, Sub Proyecto de Ecologia: Protocol for Environmental Sampling. New York: SUNY Potsdam. 1999 Continuity and Variability in Postclassic and Colonial Animal Use at Lamanai and Tipu, Belize. In Reconstructing Ancient Maya Diet. C. White, ed. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.

PAGE 147

147 2002 The Noble Beast: Status and Differential Access to Animals in the Maya World. World Archaeology 34(3):498 515. 2003 Natural Resource Use and Classic Maya Economics: Environmental Archaeology at Motul de San Jose, Gua temala. Mayab. 2004a Historical Perspectives on Current Research Directions. In Maya Zooarchaeology: New Directions in Method and Theory. K.F. Emery, ed. Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology at UCLA. 2004b In Search of Assemblage Comparabilit y: Methods in Maya Zooarchaeology. In Maya Zooarchaeology: New Directions in Method and Theory. K.F. Emery, ed: Cotsen Insititute of Archaeology at UCLA. Emery, Kitty F., and Erin Kennedy Thornton 2008a A regional perspective on biotic change during the C lassic Maya occupation using zooarchaeological isotopic chemistry. Quaternary International 191:131 143. 2008b Zooarchaeological Habitat Analysis of Ancient Maya Landscape Changes. Journal of Ethnobiology 28(2):154 178. Feinman, Gary M., and Christopher P. Garraty 2010 Preindustrial Markets and Marketing: Archaeological Perspectives. Annual Reviews in Anthropology 39:167 191. Fernndez, Fabin G., Kristofer D. Johnson, Richard E. Terry, Sheldon D. Nelson, and David Webster 2005 Soil Resources of the An cient Maya at Piedras Negras, Guatemala. Soil Science Society of America Journal 69:2020 2032. Foias, Antonia E. 2002 At the Crossroads: The Economic Basis of Political Power in the Petexbatun Region. In Ancient Maya Political Economies. M.A. Masson and D .A. Friedel, eds. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press.

PAGE 148

148 Foias, Antonia E., and Kitty F. Emery In Press Politics and Economics: Theoretical Perspectives of the Motul de San Jos Project. In Politics, History and Economy in the Classic Maya Polity of Motul de S an Jos, Guatemala. A.E. Foias and K.F. Emery, eds. Gainesville, FL: University of Florida Press. Foias, Antonia E., Christina T. Halperin, Ellen Spensley, and Jeannette Castellanos In Press Architecture, Volumetrics and Social Stratification at Motul de San Jos During the Late and Terminal Classic. In Politics, History and Economy in the Classic Maya Polity of Motul de San Jos, Guatemala. A.E. Foias and K.F. Emery, eds. Gainesville, FL: University Press of Florida. Ford, Anabel 2008 Dominant Plants of the Maya Forest and Gardens of El Pilar: Implications for Paleoenvironmental Reconstructions. Journal of Ethnobiology 28(2):179 199. Freiwald, Carolyn R. 2009 Dietary Diversity in the Upper Belize River Valley: A Zooarchaeological and Isotopic Perspective In Pre Columbian Foodways: Interdisciplinary Approaches to Food, Culture, and Markets in Ancient Mesoamerica. J. Staller and M. Carrasco, eds. New York: Springer. Garraty, Christopher P. 2010 Investigating Market Exchange in Ancient Societies: a Theoret ical Review. In Archaeological Approaches to Market Exchange in Ancient Societies. C.P. Garraty and B.L. Stark, eds. Boulder: University of Colorado Press. Goldstein, David J., and Jon B. Hageman 2009 Power Plants: Paleobotanical Evidence of Rural Feastin g in Late Classic Belize. In Pre Columbian Foodways: Interdisciplinary Approaches to Food, Culture, and Markets in Ancient Mesoamerica. J. Staller and M. Carrasco, eds. New York: Springer. Guderjan, Thomas H., and Samantha Krause 2011 Identifying the Exte nt of Ancient Maya Ditched Field Systems in the Ro Hondo Valley A Pilot Study. In The 19th Annual Report of the Blue Creek Archaeological Project. T.H. Guderjan, ed. Tyler, Texas: University of Texas at Tyler.

PAGE 149

149 Halperin, Christina T. In Press Figurine Economies at Motul de San Jose: Multiple and Shifting Modes of Valuation. In Politics, History, and Economy at the Classic Maya Polity of Motul de San Jose, Guatemala. A.E. Foias and K.F. Emery, eds. Gainesville: University Press of Florida. Halperin, Chri stina T., and Antonia E. Foias In Press Motul de San Jos Palace Pottery Production: Reconstructions from Wasters and Debris. In Politics, History, and Economy at the Classic Maya Polity of Motul de San Jose, Guatemala. A.E. Foias and K.F. Emery, eds. Gai nesville: University of Florida Press. Hansen, Richard D., Steven Bozarth, John Jacob, David Wahl, and Thomas Schreiner 2002 Climatic and Environmental Variability in the Rise of Maya Civilization. Ancient Mesoamerica 2002(13):273 295. Hastorf, Christine, William T. Whitehead, and Sissel Johannessen 2005 Late Prehistoric Wood Use in an Andean Intermontane Valley. Economic Botany 59(4):337 355. Hayden, B., and A. Cannon 1983 Where the Garbage Goes: Refuse Disposal in the Maya Highlands. Journal of Anthrop ological Archaeology 2:117 163. Hirth, Kenneth G. 1998 The Distributional Approach: A New Way to Identify Marketplace Exchange in the Archaeological Record. Current Anthropology 39(4):451 476. 2000 The Economics of Distribution: Marketplaces, Market Sy stems, and Long Distance Trade. In Ancient Urbanism at Xochicalco: the evolution and organization of a pre hispanic society. K.G. Hirth, ed. Salt Lake City: The University of Utah Press. 2009 Craft Production in a Central Mexican Marketplace. Ancient Me soamerica 20:89 102.

PAGE 150

150 2010 Finding the Mark in the Marketplace: The Organization, Development, and Archaeological Identification of Market Systems. In Archaeological Approaches to Market Exchange in Ancient Societies. C.P. Garraty and B.L. Stark, eds. Boulder: University of Colorado Press. Hudson, Jean, Phillip L. Walker, and Barbara Voorhies 1989 Changing Patterns of Faunal Exploitation. In Ancient Trade and Tribute: Economies of the Soconusco Region of Mesoamerica. B. Voorhies, ed. Salt Lake City: Un iversity of Utah Press. Jensen, Christopher T., Kristofer D. Johnson, and Richard E. Terry 2001 Anlisis Quimicos de Suelos en Motul de San Jos. In Proyecto Arqueologca Motul de San Jos: Informe Preliminar #4 de la Cuarta Temporada 2001. A.E. Foias, ed : Report presented to the Guatemalan Institute of Anthropology and History. Jensen, Christopher T., Matthew D. Moriarty, Kristofer D. Johnson, Richard E. Terry, Kitty F. Emery, and Sheldon D. Nelson 2007 Soil Resources of the Motul De San Jos Maya: Corre lating Soil Taxonomy and Modern Itz Maya Soil Classification Within a Classic Maya Archaeological Zone. Geoarchaeology 22(3):337 357. Kepecs, Susan 1994 Cichn Itz and its Hinterlands. Ancient Mesoamerica 5:141 158. LeCount, Lisa J. 2001 Like Water for Chocolate: Feasting and Political Ritual among the Late Classic Maya at Xunantunich, Belize. American Anthropologist 103(4). Lentfer, C. J., and W. E. Boyd 2000 Simultaneous Extraction of Phytoliths, Pollen and Spores from Sediments Journal for Archaeolo gical Science 27:363 372. Lentz, David L. 1999 Plant Resources of the Ancient Maya: The Paleoethnobotanical Evidence. In Reconstructing Ancient Maya Diet. C. White, ed. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press.

PAGE 151

151 Lentz, David L., M. Beaudry Corbett, M. L. Reyna de Aguilar, and L. Kaplan 1996 Foodstuffs, forests, fields, and shelter: A paleoethnobotanical analysis of vessel contents from the Cern Site, El Salvador. Latin American Antiquity 7:247 262. Lentz, David L., Jason Yeager, Cynthia Robin, and Wendy Ashmore 2005 Pine, prestige and politics of the Late Classic Maya at Xunantunich, Belize. American Antiquity 79(2005):573 585. Leyden, Barbara W., Mark Brenner, Tom Whitmore, Jason H. Curtis, Dolores Piperno, and Bruce H. Dahlin 1996 A Record of Long an d Short Term Climatic Variation from Northwest Yucatn: Cenote San Jos Chulchac. In The Managed Mosaic: Ancient Maya Agriculture and Resource Use. S.L. Fedick, ed. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press. Masson, Marilyn A. 1999 Animal resource manipul ation in ritual and domestic contexts at Postclassic Maya communities. World Archaeology 31(1):93 120. 2002 Introduction. In Ancient Maya Political Economies. M.A. Masson and D.A. Friedel, eds. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press. McAnany, Patricia A., Ben S. Thomas, Steven Morandi, Polly A. Peterson, and Eleanor Harrison 2002 Praise the Ajaw and Pass the Kakaw: Xibun Maya and the Political Economy of Cacao. In Ancient Maya Political Economies. M.A. Masson and D.A. Friedel, eds. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press. Miksicek, Charles H. 1990 Early Wetland Agriculture in the Maya Lowlands: Clues from Preserved Plant Remains. In Ancient Maya Wetland Agriculture. M.D. Pohl, ed. San Francisco: Westview Press. Moholy Nagy, Hattula 1978 The Utilization of Pomacea S nails at Tikal, Guatemala. American Antiquity 43(1):65 73.

PAGE 152

152 1985 The Social and Ceremonial Uses of Marine Mollusks at Tikal. In Prehistoric Lowland Maya Environment and Subsistence Economy. M.D. Pohl, ed. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University. 2004 Verte brates in Tikal Burials and Caches. In Maya Zooarchaeology: New Directions in Method and Theory. K.F. Emery, ed: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology at UCLA. Morehart, Christopher T. 2002 Ancient Maya Ritual Cave Utilization: a Paleoethnobotanical Perspective Thesis presented to the Department of Anthropology, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida. Moriarty, Matthew D. 2004 Settlement Archaeology at Motul de San Jos, Petn Guatemala. Mayab 17. Mueller, Andreas D., Gerald A. Islebe, Michael B. Hill esheim, Dustin A. Grzesik, Flavio S. Anselmetti, Daniel Ariztequi, Mark Brenner, Jason H. Curtis, David A. Hodell, and Kathryn A. Venz 2009 Climate drying and associated forest decline in the lowlands of northern Guatemala during the late Holocene. Quater nary Research 71:133 141. Mullholland, Susan C. 1993 A Test of Phytolith Analysis at Big Hidatsa, North Dakota. In Current Research in Phytolith Analysis: Applications in Archaeology and Paleoecology. D. Pearsall and D. Piperno, eds. Philadelphia: Univers ity of Pennsylvania Press. Nations, James D. 1979 Snail Shells and Maize Preparation: A Lacandon Maya Analogy. American Antiquity 44(3):568 571. Overpeck, J.T., Thompson III Webb, and I. Colin Prentice 1985 Quantitative interpretation of fossil pollen sp ectra: dissimilarity coefficients and the method of modern analogs.

PAGE 153

153 Pearsall, Deborah 2000 Paleoethnobotany: A Handbook of Procedures. San Diego: Academic Press. Pearsall, Deborah, and Elizabeth H. Dinan 1992 Developing a Phytolith Classification Syste m. In Phytolith Systematics: Emerging Issues. G.J. Rapp and S.C. Mullholland, eds. New York: Plenum Press. Peres, Tanya M. 2010 Methodological Issues in Zooarchaeology. In Integrating Zooarchaeology and Paleoethnobotany: A Consideration of Issues, Methods and Cases. A.M. VanDerwarker and T.M. Peres, eds. New York: Springer. Piperno, Dolores 1985 Phytolith analysis and tropical paleoecology: production and taxonomic significance of siliceous forms in New World plant domesticates and wild species. Review o f Palaeobotany and Palynology 45:185 228. 1989 The Occurrence of Phytoliths in the Reproductive Structures of Selected Tropical Angiosperms and their Significance in Tropical Paleoecology, Paleoethnobotany, and Systematics. Review of Palaeobotany and Pa lynology 61:147 173. 1993 Phytolith and Charcoal Records from Deep Lake Cores in the American Tropics. In Current Research in Phytolith Analysis: Applications in Archaeology and Paleoecology. D. Pearsall and D. Piperno, eds. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. 1994 A comparison and differentiation of phytoliths from maize ( Zea m ays L.) and wild grasses: Use of morphological criteria. American Antiquity 49:361 383. 2003 The Production, Deposition and Dissolution of Phytoliths. In Phytoli ths: A Comprehensive Guide for Archaeologists and Paleoecologists. D. Piperno, ed. New York: AltaMira.

PAGE 154

154 2006 Phytoliths. Lanham, MD: AltaMira Press. Piperno, Dolores, I. Holst, L. Wessel Beaver, and T.C. Andres 2002 Evidence for the Control of Phytolit h Formation in Cucurbita Fruits by the Hard Rind (Hr) Genetic Locus: Archaeological and Ecological Implications. Proceedings of the American Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 99:10923 28. Piperno, Dolores, and Deborah Pearsall 1993 Phyto liths in the Reproductive Structures of Maize and Teosinte: Applications for the Study of Maize Evolution. Journal of Archaeological Science 20:337 62. 1998 The silica bodies of tropical American grasses: morphology, taxonomy, and implications for grass systematic and fossil phytolith identification. Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institute Press. Pohl, Mary D. 1990 The Rio Hondo Project in Northern Belize. In Ancient Maya Wetland Agriculture. M.D. Pohl, ed. San Francisco: Westview Press. Pohl, Mary D., Pa ul R. Bloom, and Kevin O. Pope 1990 Interpretation of Wetland Farming in Northern Belize: Excavations at San Antonio Ri Hondo. In Ancient Maya Wetland Agriculture. M.D. Pohl, ed. San Francisco: Westview Press. Ramirez, Fredy, Anita Snchez, and Mara Alv arado 2000 Programa de Excavaciones de Sondeo. In Proyecto Arqueologico Motul de San Jose: Informe #3 Temporada de Campo 2000. A.E. Foias and J. Castellanos, eds. Williamstown, MA: Universidad de Williams. Reents Budet, Dorie, Stanley Guenter, Ronald L. B ishop, and M. James Blackman In Press Identity and Interaction: ceramic styles and social history of the Ik' Polity, Guatemala. In Politics, History, and Economy at the Classic Maya Polity of Motul de San Jose, Guatemala. A.E. Foias and K.F. Emery, eds. G ainesville, FL: University of Florida Press. Reitz, Elizabeth J., and Elizabeth S. Wing 2008 Zooarchaeology. New York: Cambridge.

PAGE 155

155 Robin, Cynthia 2008 The Chan Site: An Introduction. Paper presente d at the annual meeting for the Society for American Archa eology. Vancouver, Canada. Rosenmeier, Micheal F., David A. Hodell, Mark Brenner, Jason H. Curtis, and Thomas P. Guilderson 2002 A 4000 Year Lacustrine Record of Environmental Change in the Southern Maya Lowlands, Petn, Guatemala. Quaternary Research 57: 183 190. Sangster, A. G., and M. J. Hodson 1992 Silicon and Aluminum Codeposition in the Cell Wall of Gymnosperm Leaves. In Phytoliths: Applications in Earth Sciences and Human History. J.D. Meunier and F. Colin, eds. Lisse: Balkema Publishers. Shaw, Just ine M. 1999 Social and Ecological Aspects of Preclassic Maya Meat Consumption at Colha, Belize. In Reconstructing Ancient Maya Diet. C. White, ed. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press. Staller, John, and Michael Carrasco, eds. 2009 Pre Columbian Food ways: Interdisciplinary Approaches to Food, Culture, and Markets in Ancient Mesoamerica. New York: Springer. Stanchly, N. 2004 Picks and Stones May Break My Bones: Taphonomy and Maya Zooarchaeology. In Maya Zooarchaeology: New Directions in Method and The ory. K.F. Emery, ed. Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles. Stark, B. L., and Christopher P. Garraty 2010 Detecting Marketplace Exchange in Archaeology: A Methodological Review. In Archaeological Approaches to Market Exchange in Ancient Societies. C.P. Garraty and B.L. Stark, eds. Boulder: University of Colorado Press. Teeter, Wendy G. 2001 Animal Utilization in a Growing City: Vertebrate Exploitation at Caracol, Belize, Dissertation presented to the Departmen t of Anthropology, University of California, Los Angeles.

PAGE 156

156 2004 Animal Utilization in a Growing City: Vertebrate Exploitation at Caracol, Belize. In Maya Zooarchaeology: New Directions in Method and Theory. K.F. Emery, ed. Pp. 177 191. 2004: Cotsen Instit ute of Archaeology at UCLA. Thompson, Robert G., John P. Hart, Hetty Jo Brumbach, and Robert Lusteck 2004 Phytolith Evidence for Twentieth Century B.P. Maize in Northern Iroquoia. Northeast Anthropology 68:25 40. Thornton, Erin Kennedy 2011 Animal Resour ces in Ancient Maya Economy and Exchange: Zooarchaeological and Isotopic Perspectives, Dissertation presented to the Department of Anthropology, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida. In Press Animal Resource Use and Exchange at an Inland Maya Por t: Zooarchaeological Investigations at Trinidad de Nosotros. In Politics, History and Economy in the Classic Maya Polity of Motul de San Jos, Guatemala. K.F. Emery and A.E. Foias, eds. Gainesville: University of Florida Press. Tozzer, A. M. 1941 Landa's Relacin de las Cosas de Yucatan. Volume 18. Cambridge, Ma: Harvard University. Webb, Elizabeth A., Henry P. Schwarcz, Christopher T. Jensen, Richard E. Terry, Matthew D. Moriarty, Kitty F. Emery 2007 Stable Carbon Isotope Signature of Ancient Maize Agric ulture in the Soils of Motul De San Jos, Guatemala Geoarchaeology 22(3):291 312. Wing, Elizabeth S. 1978 Use of Dogs for Food: An Adaptation to the Coastal Environment. In Prehistoric Coastal Adaptations: The Economy and Ecology of Maritime Middle Americ a. B.L. Stark and B. Voorhies, eds. Pp. 29 41. New York: Academic Press. Wiseman, Frederick M. 1990 San Antonio: A Late Holocene Record of Agricultural Activity in the Maya Lowlands. In Ancient Maya Wetland Agriculture. M.D. Pohl, ed. San Francisco: Westv iew Press.

PAGE 157

157 Wright, Patti J. 2010 Methodological issues in paleoethnobotany: a consideration of issues, methods and cases. In Integrating Zooarchaeology and Paleoethnobotany: A consideration of issues, methods, and cases. A.M. VanDerwarker and T.M. Peres eds. New York: Springer. Wyatt, Andrew 2008a Gardens on Hills: Ancient Maya Terracing and Agricultural Production at Chan, Belize, University of Illinois at Chicago. 2008b Pine as an Element of Household Refuse in the Fertilization of Ancient Maya Ag ricultural Fields. Journal of Ethnobiology 28(2):244 258. Wyatt, Andrew, David M. Jarzen, Lizzy Hare, and Kitty F. Emery In Press Preliminary Investigations in Macro and Microbotany at Motul de San Jose. In Politics, History, and Economy at the Classic Ma ya Polity of Motul de San Jose, Guatemala. A.E. Foias and K.F. Emery, eds. Gainesville: University Press of Florida. Yorgey, Suzanna, Daniel Glick, Anita Sanchez, and Fredy Ramirez 1999 Programa de Excavaciones de Sondeo. In Proyecto Arqueologico Motul de San Jos: Informe Preliminar #2: Temporada de Campo 1999. A.E. Foias, ed: Report presented to the Guatemalan Insitute of Anthropology and History.

PAGE 158

158 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Lizzy Hare was born in Brisbane, Australia, but spent much of her childhood in the Sie rra foothills of California. Lizzy was first introduced to archaeology at Santa Monica College, where she enrolled as a student in the Pambamarca Archaeological Project in the Ecuadorian Andes. From there Lizzy went on to attend the University of Wisconsi n Madison (UW) where she majored in anthropology with a focus in a rchaeology. It was at UW that Lizzy began to cultivate an interest in paleoecology and paleobotany, as well as the history and philosophy of science. Through UW, Lizzy became involved in the Mopan Valley Archaeological Project, which she worked for during the 2007 and 2008 field seasons, as well as the Mopan Valley Preclassic Project, which she worked for in the 2008 field season. Lizzy moved to Gainesville, Florida in the summer of 2009 to begin work on her continued to develop her knowledge of paleobotany and paleoecology, but became increasingly interested in epistemological questions and the anthropolo gy of science. Beginning in the Fall of 2011, Lizzy will be returning to central California to pursue a PhD in c ultural a research will be on contributions of paleobotany and paleoecolo gy to the production of climate change knowledge and how our understandings of past vegetation affect our expectations for the present and future.